Yo All! Last week we had a discussion on sys_fuzz and the value of adding random noise to some measurements. The code defi2nes sys_fuzz asL
"* The sys_fuzz variable measures the minimum time to read the system
* clock, regardless of its precision."
Rondomness of half the sys_fuzz is then added to some values, like this:
fuzz = ntp_random() * 2. / FRAC * sys_fuzz
Makes no sense to me. Adding randomness helps when you have hysteresis,
stiction, friction, lash and some other things, but none of those apply
to NTP.
So I took two identical RasPi's and forced sys_fuzz to zero on one of
them. Four days later I can see no difference in the results from
those two.
Can anyone find a case were adding the randomness can be proved to help?
We already have all the guesses we need, anyone have any data?
Otherwise sys_fuzz * ntp_random() is more poinltess noise in the code we
can rip out.
RGDS
GARY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary E. Miller Rellim 109 NW Wilmington Ave., Suite E, Bend, OR 97703
g...@rellim.com Tel:+1 541 382 8588
Veritas liberabit vos. -- Quid est veritas?
"If you can’t measure it, you can’t improve it." - Lord Kelvin
pgpvZRNVXTDI0.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@ntpsec.org http://lists.ntpsec.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
