Richard B. Gilbert wrote: > David Woolley wrote: >> David L. Mills wrote: >> >>> Harlan, >>> >>> You make some good points. However, if folks want SNTP from here I >>> think they would prefer it in its own distribution rather than bundle >>> it with the huge NTP distribution. You can make a strong argument to >>> host here >> >> >> I don't think you are ever going to get rid of ntpdate from the >> distribution (as supplied by packagers and vendors) until ntpd offers >> a mode which sets the time within about one second of being started. >> I'm not convinced that SNTP will displace ntpdate for this purpose. >> People don't want to delay boot sequences, but they also don't want to >> start applications until the time has been set. > > How long does "ntpd -g" take to set the time? As I understand it, it's > supposed to query the configured servers, make a "best guess" as to what > time it is, set that, and then go to normal operation. > > That should put you within a second or so. If you need better, either > wait for it, or keep your server alive 24x7x365. I think most data > centers do run 24x7x365. If you're talking about a "data center" that > lives under the boss's desk, consider buying a UPS and hope that the > power doesn't fail for longer than the run time.
David is right. He means be done with it, including hard-setting the clock, within a second. The accuracy expected, based on "ntpdate -b" as the benchmark you are trying to replace, is within a small number of milliseconds of the specified servers. Sorry, "ntpd -q" doesn't meet the requirements. -Tom _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
