On 2013-03-04, janfr...@tanso.net <janfr...@tanso.net> wrote: > kl. 21:20:46 UTC+1 mandag 4. mars 2013 skrev unruh f?lgende: > > >> >> Virtualisation and time keeping should be kept as far apart as possible. >> >> Time keeping should be done by the base OS, not by one of the virtual >> >> ones. Otherwise you will get fights and bad times. > > > Yes, I know this is common wisdom, but is it still correct ? With linux/KVM > we have a paravirtualized clock. Original documentation: > https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/4/15/355 and current timekeeping.txt: > http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v3.8/Documentation/virtual/kvm/timekeeping.txt > > Also, won't an ntpd without a LOCAL clock quickly stop serving time if it's > out of sync with it's remote time sources?
No. It will bring itself into alignment with the remote time sources by stepping the time, unless it is out by more than 1000 sec or so, in which case it will quit. You should never use the local clock. It is only useful if all of the servers die ( so the system has no time source to sync with) and it MUST continue serving time, no matter how crazy or far off it is, to some other computers. > > > >> >> >> > >> >> > Should our stratum-2 servers all be connected to ntp1-4, or is it better >> > to have server1-ntp1, server2-ntp2, etc.. to make sure they don't all run >> > off the same clock source? i.e. should we for server1 have ntp.conf with: >> >> >> If source a gives good time, why should you worry about many machines >> using it? > > I don't know, that's why I'm asking :-) > We have had problems with our current stratum-1 device -- I just imagined it > might be better in failure situations if all our clients are pointed at > stratum2 servers with different reference clocks, than all hanging on the > same buggy reference clock .. ? IF the reference clock is buggy, then of course using other sources is better. But you have 4 stratum 1 servers. Can you imagine a situation in which all are "buggy"? If there is nuclear war, probably your timekeeping will be th least of your worries. Similarly if all the electrical system goes off line because of hackers or a solar storm. So, having more than one server is a good idea ( and 4 is a good number) But the only reason for using the stratum 2 is as an extreme fallback in case all the people setting up the stratum 1 servers were incompetent, or because of overloading of the servers. I do not think you should have a problem with overloading ( modern neworks should be able to handle 1000 ntp packets ever few hours) but you would have to be the one to study that. For example, if one of your links is a 300bps modem line, then even a few ntpd would be problematic. > >> >> >> And what error budget do you have for the clocks. Do they all have to >> have nanosecond accuracy, or one second accuracy? >> > > No nano second accuracy needed. One second accuracy is probably enough. Then almost anything you do should suffice. Use stratum 2 or even higher stratum sources. millisecond is easy, microsecond easily doable ( but it takes effort), nanosecond is very hard and expensive. > > > _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
