Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread unruh
On 2011-03-12, Ralph ra...@depth.net wrote: @Chris I appreciate the offer to help. I've been thinking about this problem a while and here are my thoughts... It seems to me that ntpd has the goal of keeping extremely accurate time - which is important for many obvious reasons. However

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread Uwe Klein
Chris Albertson wrote: On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:47 AM, John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com wrote: RPM writes: What's baffling, though, is why you need to add an entire virtual machine and operating system just to run another process. The problem is Windows does not multitask well. I've

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread David Woolley
Chris Albertson wrote: On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Ryan Malayter malay...@gmail.com wrote: . have you ever audited the code of your BIOS? Or the firmware on your chipsets, NICs, RAID cards, or disk drives? Your control of a physical server is just as illusory as that of a Virtual Machine.

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread Uwe Klein
David Woolley wrote: Chris Albertson wrote: Yes, Linux, after the first boot block is loaded does not use any of that code, no BIOS calls are made from the OS, none of other ROMs either. It's open Source so people read the code. My understanding is that system management mode code is still

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread David J Taylor
Is that NT3.5 fact still valid ? Never understood why anyone would use Windows for real work anyway. The thing that it does best is waiting ever faster for the next keypress from the user. uwe Perhaps people use Windows because the software they wish to run is only available for Windows? I

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread Uwe Klein
David J Taylor wrote: Is that NT3.5 fact still valid ? Never understood why anyone would use Windows for real work anyway. The thing that it does best is waiting ever faster for the next keypress from the user. uwe Perhaps people use Windows because the software they wish to run is only

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread David J Taylor
Uwe Klein uwe_klein_habertw...@t-online.de wrote in message news:h01s48-89b@klein-habertwedt.de... David J Taylor wrote: Is that NT3.5 fact still valid ? Never understood why anyone would use Windows for real work anyway. The thing that it does best is waiting ever faster for the next

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread Rob
unruh un...@wormhole.physics.ubc.ca wrote: The problem on a VM system is that the frequency jumps around. Ie, when the VM is running, its frequency should be very close to the fundamental clock frequency, and when it is not running, its freq is 0. What do you know about that? Did you ever do a

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread Rob
unruh un...@wormhole.physics.ubc.ca wrote: On 2011-03-08, Ralph ra...@depth.net wrote: When are you going to start working on it? ... or are you asking others to do free programming for you, to work around your unique problem? Maybe I deserve that flame for having ranted a bit, but

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread Ralph
On Friday, March 11, 2011 11:49:39 PM UTC-8, unruh wrote: No, that is not the problem. The problem is that the computer has an internal clock that depends on things like counting processor cycles. If suddenly the processor disappears for a while with no processor cycles, the timing will be

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread Ralph
Right. So what would be good is a solution along the lines of those methods that simply use the time off the time servers without worrying about the local clock, but that 'fix' the local clock in a more friendly way like ntpd does. (See my other reply for a few other ideas).

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread Ralph
Appartently timesharing is for educational environments now; and not just for 'big iron'... http://www.microsoft.com/windows/multipoint/ ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread John Hasler
Ralph writes: So what would be good is a solution along the lines of those methods that simply use the time off the time servers without worrying about the local clock... How are you going to measure the offset? -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Dancing Horse Hill Elmwood, WI USA

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread Ralph
As I outline in my other post, this method wouldn't care about offset. It isn't about precision accuracy, it's about relative consistency. ___ questions mailing list questions@lists.ntp.org http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/questions

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread Chris Albertson
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 1:24 AM, David Woolley david@ex.djwhome.demon.invalid wrote: Chris Albertson wrote: My understanding is that system management mode code is still executed. It does not runif it is disabled of not present. and of course this only applies to PC hardware. Linux runs on

Re: [ntp:questions] Flash 400 on all peers; can't get ntpd to be happy

2011-03-12 Thread Chris Albertson
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 11:14 AM, Ralph ra...@depth.net wrote: Right.  So what would be good is a solution along the lines of those methods that simply use the time off the time servers without worrying about the local clock, but that 'fix' the local clock in a more friendly way like ntpd does.