It looks like my server picked up the Leap Second, but it just counted
19:59:59 twice.
Check it out: (NOTE: EDT -0400 Timezone).

Sat, Jun 30 2012 19:59:59.387
Sat, Jun 30 2012 19:59:59.894
Sat, Jun 30 2012 19:59:59.401
Sat, Jun 30 2012 19:59:59.907
Sat, Jun 30 2012 20:00:00.656
Sat, Jun 30 2012 20:00:01.170
Sat, Jun 30 2012 20:00:01.677

-Alby





On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:45 AM, Kim B. Sindalsen <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On my two linux-boxes I've got this in my logs:
>
> Box 1: Jul 01 01:59:59 [kernel] [11613806.049909] Clock: inserting leap
> second 23:59:60 UTC
>
> Box 2: Jul 01 01:59:59 [kernel] [976439.291563] Clock: inserting leap
> second
> 23:59:60 UTC
>
> (I'm on UTC+2)
>
> That's the only thing in my logs I could find indicating that something
> happened tonight ;)
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dave Hart
> Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2012 01:40
> To: Daniel Norton
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Pool] Leap Second UTC
>
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 8:40 PM, Daniel Norton <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > From http://www.ntp.org/ntpfaq/NTP-s-algo-real.htm#AEN2499
> >
> > 5.3.4. What happens during a Leap Second?
> >
> > The theory of leap seconds in explained in Q: 2.4.. In reality there
> > are two cases to consider:
> >
> > If the operating system implements the kernel discipline described in
> > Section 5.2, ntpd will announce insertion and deletion of leap seconds
> > to the kernel. The kernel will handle the leap seconds without further
> > action necessary.
>
> Although exactly how it's handled is platform-defined.  One can imagine
> simply stepping the clock, pausing the system for a second, or more subtle
> schemes that try to ensure always-increasing clock readings.  I'm curious
> if
> any don't simply step the clock.
>
> > If the operating system does not implement the kernel discipline, the
> > clock will show an error of one second relative to NTP's time
> > immediate after the leap second. The situation will be handled just
> > like an unexpected change of
> > time: The operating system will continue with the wrong time for some
> > time, but eventually ntpd will step the time. Effectively this will
> > cause the correction for leap seconds to be applied too late.
>
> NAK on that FAQ.  Well, assuming recent ntpd that is.  I'm not sure when it
> changed, but modern ntpd steps the clock back if not using the kernel loop
> discipline.  That FAQ hasn't been maintained in many years and is
> increasingly unhelpful.  I'd like to see it updated simply to say it's out
> of date and shouldn't be relied upon.  The intended replacement is the
> http://support.ntp.org collection of [t]wikis.
>
> Cheers,
> Dave Hart
> _______________________________________________
> pool mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool
>
> _______________________________________________
> pool mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool
>
_______________________________________________
pool mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool

Reply via email to