Dave, Dave Hart wrote: >> Unfortunately under W2k the new code does not seem to work as good during >> the first minutes after startup > > 20000 seconds is 5.5 hours, the length of the roller-coaster ride it > took as I read it. I see inflection points which I'm guessing are 512 > seconds apart where the counter frequency estimate was changed. I'd > like to see the ntp.log or event log entries for the first few hours > of that w2k run, if available. I'm particularly interested in the > (frequent) messages showing the ctr frequency observations and running > average.
I'll send you the event log file and the raw loopstats via private mail. > Meanwhile, I've been whacking on this code more to try to get cleaner > samples to begin with by using a separate timer and callback (though > same thread) for managing the counter frequency, and by starting out > with the history of observations effectively filled with the nominal > performance counter rate, so the adjustment starts happening after one > period (currently testing 512 seconds again after many tests again > with smaller periods), albeit at a moderated rate. After the first > period, with a depth of 4, the rate used is the average of one > observation and 3 nominal rates. After two, half from observation and > half nominal. Those change might affect this behavior. > > I'm much more interested in the w2k improvements than vista. The > blunt object fix of using the native clock is boring and hasn't needed > any fine tuning ;) Yes, it works really great! Martin -- Martin Burnicki Meinberg Funkuhren Bad Pyrmont Germany _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
