For the record, when using R, the package "lubridate" (which is part of the brilliant "tidyverse") does handle leap seconds.
Dr Jim Palfreyman On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 at 07:08, Fiorenzo Cattaneo <f...@cattaneo.us> wrote: > Yes correct. NTP behaves as intended. I called NTP issue as that's > what commonly called in the industry, but in reality it's applications > which are unable to deal with time steppings. > The LEAP second smearing that Google (and others too, now AWS as well) > is as you say, just a hack to avoid application problems. > > I am starting to realize I need to very precise (no pun intended) when > writing on this mailing list. Please accept my apologies, this is my > first thread I contribute to. > > > > -- Fio Cattaneo > > Universal AC, can Entropy be reversed? -- "THERE IS AS YET > INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR A MEANINGFUL ANSWER." > > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 9:01 AM Martin Burnicki > <martin.burni...@burnicki.net> wrote: > > > > Fiorenzo Cattaneo wrote: > > > Yes of course you are right. NTP timebase (based on UTC with an epoch > > > of 1900-01-01 00:00:00, or its representation in Unix time - seconds > > > since 1970-01-01 00:00:00) is timezone independent. > > > > > > I just wanted to make the point that in the IT world (I've worked for > > > Amazon, Microsoft, Twitter and now I work for another major IT > > > supplier) we keep spending billions of dollars to maintain really > > > crappy and cruddy libraries which deal with timezones, and still get > > > plenty of bugs every time. > > > Not to mention NTP issues when leapseconds are addded > > > > It's not an NTP issue. NTP only forwards the leap second announcement to > > the kernel, if the kernel supports this. It's up to the kernel how a > > leap second is handled. Most *ix kernels just step the time back by > > default, which is confusing for applications that haven't been designed > > to cope with such steps. > > > > Except for latest Windows server versions, Windows doesn't care about > > leap seconds at all, and the system time simply off by 1 second after a > > leap second event. This offset persists until some time synchronization > > software corrects it. > > > > > (the only > > > company which handled the last leap second correctly was google, as > > > they slowly slewed at the rate of 1s/hour). > > > > This is just a hack. During the slewing the time is off by up to +/- 0.5 > > s, or even up to 1 s depending on the kind of slewing. This can mess up > > applications that require a very accurate absolute time. > > > > Martin > > > > _______________________________________________ > > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com > > To unsubscribe, go to > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > > and follow the instructions there. > > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to > http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com > and follow the instructions there. > _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@lists.febo.com To unsubscribe, go to http://lists.febo.com/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts_lists.febo.com and follow the instructions there.
