Zitat von Chuck Swiger <[email protected]>:
On Mar 24, 2011, at 7:42 PM, Ryan Tucker wrote:
If you do run ntpd, everything is fine. It has no problems keeping
accurate time, and the PLL stats show no differences from real hardware.
It makes for perfectly capable pool servers, too.
Please show me some data, ie, "ntpq -pcrv" output.....
Inside a OpenVZ container:
assID=0 status=0694 leap_none, sync_ntp, 9 events, event_peer/strat_chg,
version="ntpd [email protected] Fri Dec 4 18:18:33 UTC 2009 (1)",
processor="i686", system="Linux/2.6.18-028stab079.1", leap=00,
stratum=2, precision=-20, rootdelay=13.606, rootdispersion=9.066,
peer=65115, refid=160.45.10.8,
reftime=d136d27f.0d37f207 Fri, Mar 25 2011 9:36:15.051, poll=6,
clock=d136d34e.a1451eeb Fri, Mar 25 2011 9:39:42.629, state=4,
offset=0.265, frequency=0.000, jitter=0.093, noise=0.865,
stability=0.000, tai=0
remote refid st t when poll reach delay offset jitter
==============================================================================
+ntps1-1.cs.tu-b .PPS. 1 u 7 64 375 14.515 0.238 0.141
+ptbtime2.ptb.de .PTB. 1 u 17 64 377 16.886 0.320 0.341
-ntp2.rrze.uni-e .PPS. 1 u 23 64 377 16.579 5.944 0.096
*zeit.fu-berlin. .PPS. 1 u 13 64 377 13.606 0.257 0.083
-rustime01.rus.u .PPS. 1 u 14 64 377 18.528 6.129 0.099
-ntp1.nl.uu.net .PPS. 1 u 9 64 377 18.028 5.537 0.032
Can someone knowledgeable comment on the data. I would suspect that
the jitter is the most important point for accuracy of time sync, no?
Regards
Andreas
_______________________________________________
pool mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool
