On 17 Oct, 2011, at 15:14 , Hal Murray wrote:
> In article ,
> unruh writes:
>
>> In fact it is really hard for a computer to keep to 1us accuracy because
>> of the delays in interrupt processing.
>
> It's not the delay that is the problem. It's simple to correct for a
> fixed delay. (at leas
On 2011-10-17, Hal Murray wrote:
> In article ,
> unruh writes:
>
>>In fact it is really hard for a computer to keep to 1us accuracy because
>>of the delays in interrupt processing.
>
> It's not the delay that is the problem. It's simple to correct for a
> fixed delay. (at least in theory) Th
In article ,
unruh writes:
>In fact it is really hard for a computer to keep to 1us accuracy because
>of the delays in interrupt processing.
It's not the delay that is the problem. It's simple to correct for a
fixed delay. (at least in theory) The problem is variations in the delay.
Jitter
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 20:23, David Woolley
wrote:
> Nickolay Orekhov wrote:
>
>> # midist : increased minimal distance for PPS reference clocks ( default
>> 0.001s )
>> tos mindist 0.032
>
>
> I can't answer your specific question, but using PPS generally indicates an
> attempt to get highly ac
Nickolay Orekhov wrote:
# midist : increased minimal distance for PPS reference clocks ( default
0.001s )
tos mindist 0.032
I can't answer your specific question, but using PPS generally indicates
an attempt to get highly accurate time, whereas the above disables the
kernel time discipline
On 17 October 2011 20:04, unruh wrote:
> On 2011-10-17, Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
>> The reason is that I already have one of each and want a different
>> third clock. Nothing against Garmin or Sure. In fact, I highly
>
> How different? Do you want it depending on the same thing-- gps? Or do
> you
On 2011-10-17, Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
> On 17 October 2011 17:37, unruh wrote:
>> On 2011-10-17, Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
>>> Excluding the Garmins and Sure Evaluation Boards which both have PPS
>>> outputs what are the best (meaning well supported) refclocks today to
>>> set up a new server?
>>
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 10:45 AM, unruh wrote:
> On 2011-10-17, Chris Albertson wrote:
> > 2011/10/17 Miguel Gon?alves
> >
> >> what are the best (meaning well supported) refclocks today to
> >> set up a new server?
> >
> >
> > Likely the GPS with the best PPS is the new Oncore. But for NTP
On 17 October 2011 17:37, unruh wrote:
> On 2011-10-17, Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
>> Excluding the Garmins and Sure Evaluation Boards which both have PPS
>> outputs what are the best (meaning well supported) refclocks today to
>> set up a new server?
>
> Perhaps you should tell us what your require
On 2011-10-17, Danny Mayer wrote:
> On 10/6/2011 3:31 PM, Yan Seiner wrote:
>> Just came across this on /.
>>
>> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/10/06/1743226/civil-suit-filed-involving-the-time-zone-database
>>
>> ??
>>
>
> ICANN has taken over responsibility for the timezone database and
On 2011-10-17, Chris Albertson wrote:
> 2011/10/17 Miguel Gon?alves
>
>> what are the best (meaning well supported) refclocks today to
>> set up a new server?
>
>
> Likely the GPS with the best PPS is the new Oncore. But for NTP you don't
> need 5 nanosecond accuracy. From NTP's point of vie
2011/10/17 Miguel Gonçalves
> what are the best (meaning well supported) refclocks today to
> set up a new server?
Likely the GPS with the best PPS is the new Oncore. But for NTP you don't
need 5 nanosecond accuracy. From NTP's point of view 5 nS is not better
than 50 nS.
Chris Albertson
On 10/6/2011 3:31 PM, Yan Seiner wrote:
> Just came across this on /.
>
> http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/10/06/1743226/civil-suit-filed-involving-the-time-zone-database
>
> ??
>
ICANN has taken over responsibility for the timezone database and you
can get it here: http://www.iana.org/time
On 2011-10-17, Miguel Gon?alves wrote:
> On 17 October 2011 10:03, Hal Murray
> wrote:
>>
>> There is a driver that covers the Trimble Palisade and Thunderbolt.
>>
>> If you are lucky, it will work with the Resolution. ?If not, it is
>> probably reasonable to add support for it.
>
> Excluding the
Hello!
I have the following configuration:
=
# drift frequency file
driftfile /fs/sd/etc/ntp.drift
# midist : increased minimal distance for PPS reference clocks ( default
0.001s )
tos mindist 0.032
# panic : zero to accept in
On 17 October 2011 10:03, Hal Murray
wrote:
>
> There is a driver that covers the Trimble Palisade and Thunderbolt.
>
> If you are lucky, it will work with the Resolution. If not, it is
> probably reasonable to add support for it.
Excluding the Garmins and Sure Evaluation Boards which both have
In article ,
Bill Unruh writes:
> fine. Otherwise I have never used trimble proprietary language so have no
> idea what driver to use.
There is a driver that covers the Trimble Palisade and Thunderbolt.
If you are lucky, it will work with the Resolution. If not, it is
probably reasonable to a
Miguel Gonçalves wrote:
tick# ntpq -p ntp4.ja.net
remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter
==
*GENERIC(0) .DCFa. 0 l 58 64 3770.0000.064 0.716
tick# nt
18 matches
Mail list logo
