On 2008-05-17, Chris Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Once upon a time, David Woolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >>I'm not convinced this is even about laptops. I think it is about >>PDAs, or about embedded systems that may run for a year on a couple of >>AA bateries, or may run on small photocell arrays. > > It is about pretty much anything running Linux, from embedded devices > to servers. Large colocation factilities have discovered that the > limiting factor is not space anymore, but power and cooling. Anything > that can be done that makes the servers use less power is a big win.
A system functioning as an NTP server (i.e. one which answers polls from clients) needs to be ready to respond to a poll at any time. It stands to reason the such a system would likely never be completely quiescent. And that such a system probably could not, or should not, take advantage of this power-saving patch, A system funtioning as an NTP client (i.e. a leaf node with no polling clients) merely has to be awake enough to poll its time sources and discipline its clock in compliance with its time stability requirements. This discussion is arguing the merits of a patch without any consideration of when its use is indicated. As stated elsewhere in this thread, one size does _not_ fit all. -- Steve Kostecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/ _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
