Danny,
If you looked more closely, you would have discovered rackety was within
a few microseconds of the PPS time; however, the GPS receiver timecode
suddenly jumped 2 ms from nominal and that exceeded the intersection
window. This demonstrates the zeal of cross checking the PPS and
timecode
Uwe Klein wrote:
David Woolley wrote:
G8KBV wrote:
http://bifferos.bizhat.com/
Since when has Intel architecture been reduced instruction set. Looks
like someone's marketing department has completely devalued RISC!
Thats a nice and cheap toy. ( thanks for the hint G8KBV
David,
On Jul 26, 12:30 am, David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.not-
this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid wrote:
paul wrote:
[]
Thanks, but I mean something which do not rely on the output of
ntpq.exe.
My NTP Monitor uses NTP network calls to determine the offset of the PCs -
it doesn't use
Although you might be able to drive a real (non-USB) parallel port, from
application code, with fairly low latency the results would only be
meaningful for a very unloaded machine, as, on a loaded machine, you
wouldn't really know where you where in the system tick interval, when
you read the
paul wrote:
On Jul 26, 12:30 am, David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.not-
[]
What problem are you trying to solve, and how accurately do you need
to measure?
I'm just not so sure if I can absolutely count on ntpq to determine
time offset of NTP synced machines...
Good question, which I
paul chaofu.c...@gmail.com writes:
On Jul 26, 12:30=A0am, David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.not-
this-part.nor-this.co.uk.invalid wrote:
paul wrote:
[]
Thanks, but I mean something which do not rely on the output of
ntpq.exe.
My NTP Monitor uses NTP network calls to determine the
Unruh wrote:
You can absolutely count on ntpq to tell you what ntp thinks the offset
is based on its querying of the servers or refclocks. What makes you
not so sure.
I don't think he wants the NTP offset metric; I think he wants the
difference between software clock time and true UTC.
Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
ISTR reading that the Intel 80x86 line was CISC on top and RISC
underneath. I couldn't swear to it though. All I ever saw or worked
with was the CISC part of it.
I think that pretty much defines CISC. CISC machines are normally
micro-program driven machines.
On 2009-07-26, paul chaofu.c...@gmail.com wrote:
On Jul 26, 12:30 am, David J Taylor david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk
wrote:
What problem are you trying to solve, and how accurately do you need
to measure?
I'm just not so sure if I can absolutely count on ntpq to determine
time offset of NTP
