"Gautam Thaker" <ghtha...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bbf7043d-935c-4a9d-8b8e-a30d44779...@8g2000prb.googlegroups.com...
On Feb 26, 5:44 am, Dave Hart <daveh...@gmail.com> wrote:
http://davehart.net/moo/ntpd-QPC-20090614-0900.zip
That represents the last in a series of 4.2.4p6-based private releases
of mine.
OK, so started to use this 4.2.4p6 version and immediately saw a
reduction in variations in the "offset" value.
see graphic at:
http://www.atl.external.lmco.com/projects/QoS/documents/feb26_offset.png
I should note a few things:
1) when i switched to this version of ntpd.exe, the ntpq.exe from
4.2.7p98 did not seem to be able to query the daemon.
2) Meingberg Time Service Monitor GUI program was reporting status
(presumably since it is based on 4.2.4 ?)
3) I switched to using ntpq.exe from 4.2.4 that comes w/ Meinberg
install and that ntpq.exe worked ok.
4) while the offset reported has become much less wild I noted that
both 'delay' and 'jitter' values reported are ALWAYS now just "0.977".
This should be an indication that something is not right and thus I
don't know if i can trust the improved "offset" value stability.
Any comments welcome.
Gautam
Interesting to compare your:
http://www.atl.external.lmco.com/projects/QoS/documents/feb26_offset.png
with the earlier:
http://www.atl.external.lmco.com/projects/QoS/documents/feb24_1.png
It shows just how much better the 4.2.4 version was than the current
version. I do hope that this will encourage someone to look again at the
code with a view to discovering the differences and making the current
version work as well as the previous operation. Even if I had the source
code (which I don't), I don't read C well enough, nor do I have the
necessary understanding of the core algorithms.
Maybe one for that Google Summer of Code, which someone was asking about?
(1) is a real pain - why cannot backwards compatibility be provided? Does
it make the query program too complex?
(4) may just be a function of the lack of interpolation under Vista/Win-7
coupled with the use of a nominal 1000Hz clock (actual interval 0.977ms).
As I understand it, that likely means ntp is working as intended on that
platform.
Cheers,
David
_______________________________________________
questions mailing list
questions@lists.ntp.org
http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
