unruh wrote: > David J Taylor wrote: >> Others have reported precisions better than -19, >> and also have a need for greater reporting precision. > That is a valid issue.
I checked two typical desktops here: ntpq -c "rv &0" processor="x86", system="Windows", leap=00, stratum=3, precision=-21, ~477ns ? >> There seems to be an impression out there that I'm trying >> to show something is wrong - I'm not. >> I suggested an enhancement so that the precision of ntpq >> matched that of the loopstats. That's all. loopstats' clock offset and RMS jitter are to the nano-second ? That should be good for up to maybe precision=-30 ? > precision is not accuracy. > In science we teach students not to report unwarranted > precision-- the precision should reflect the accuracy > of the measurements. > I am not averse to reporting with a precision maybe up > to a factor of 10 better than the accuracy precision=-19 is ~001.907us ? Would not a factor of 10 be hundreds of nano-seconds? -- E-Mail Sent to this address <blackl...@anitech-systems.com> will be added to the BlackLists. _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
