On 2013-11-09, David J Taylor <david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote: >Charles Elliott wrote: > >> The result of reading the timestamp counter can vary wildly due to >> EIST (speed step technology), turbo modes, and owner overclocking, in >> addition to differences in CPUs, as noted. There is quite a bit about >> this on the Internet. As I recall, most writers recommend not using >> it, but if one must, using it only for short interval timing and >> after repeatedly measuring the frequency of the counter. The latter >> can take quite a bit of time, as it should be done several times, and >> for different interval lengths, and taking the average or median of >> the results.
[snip] > Charles, and mail list admins - just to let you know that your message did > not appear to reach the newsgroup: > > comp.protocols.time.ntp > > at least on my feed from Eternal-September. An article from Charles made it to the Google Groups mirror of c.p.t.n: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.protocols.time.ntp/VLNotnd_nms/vBCbcxQkp3MJ Looks like a problem with your free news server. -- Steve Kostecke <koste...@ntp.org> NTP Public Services Project - http://support.ntp.org/ _______________________________________________ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions
