"unruh" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
[]
Mine is within about 6 microseconds, in a non-temperature controlled
environment (running 24 x 7). Looking at the plots it is quite clear
that
temperature variations are the limiting factor in accuracy, and not
NTP.
No, it is ntpd. It is because ntpd is so slow to respond to errors that
and it takes so long to correct for those temp changes, that the
accuracy is what it is. (That and ntp's behaviour of throwing away 80%
of the data it collects).
I would be quite willing to test a fast-response option in ntpd to see
whether it makes nay difference.
IF your file has the correct drift information in it (linux for example
with the tsc clock changes its drift about 40PPM on each bootup) and if
it has not been very long since the machine was switched off, then yes,
it will be accurate very fast. Those are big ifs. The question is how
long does it take ntpd to recover from errors. The figures I gave above
give you a clue. chrony is at least an order of magnitude faster.
Well, if Linux is that badly behaved (altering its clock on each boot), I
would have said that was an OS defect which needed correction, not
altering ntpd to accommodate faulty software!
For me, performance under normal use is probably more important than
performance under error conditions.
When chrony has a Windows version and provide a similar command-line
ability to "ntpq -p" for getting performance data into MRTG I would
consider testing it on a client PC here.
Cheers,
David
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
