On 31/10/2012 21:04, unruh wrote:
On 2012-10-31, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
NTPD is a "slow starter"! Ideally, you will only start it once and
let it run for a few months.
How slow is a "slow start"?. It can take NTPD up to ten hours to
synchronize within + or - 50 nanoseconds with whatev
David Taylor wrote:
On a recent restart from cold, the server here took about 15 minutes to
get to within 250 microseconds, and about an hour to be within 10
microseconds. Ultimately it is within about 3 microseconds.
3 microseconds of what? How are you measuring the difference between
s
David Taylor wrote:
On 31/10/2012 21:04, unruh wrote:
On 2012-10-31, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
[]
NTPD is a "slow starter"! Ideally, you will only start it once and
let it run for a few months.
How slow is a "slow start"?. It can take NTPD up to ten hours to
synchronize within + or - 50 na
On 01/11/2012 08:40, David Woolley wrote:
David Taylor wrote:
On a recent restart from cold, the server here took about 15 minutes
to get to within 250 microseconds, and about an hour to be within 10
microseconds. Ultimately it is within about 3 microseconds.
3 microseconds of what? How ar
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
I'm researching how to increase the precision one can achieve by using
our NTP-servers, and bumped into this chip (Intel i210) today. It seem
that 802.1Qav support adds "LaunchTime", to tell the transmit buffer
when a packet is supposed to go out on th
David Taylor wrote:
On 01/11/2012 08:40, David Woolley wrote:
David Taylor wrote:
On a recent restart from cold, the server here took about 15 minutes
to get to within 250 microseconds, and about an hour to be within 10
microseconds. Ultimately it is within about 3 microseconds.
3 microsec
Is there any way to poll ntp for full precision variables?
If you do an ntpq query for offset, you get 1 us precision:
locke:~# ntpq -c "rv 0 offset" locke
offset=-0.001
But loopstats records offset with 1 ns precision:
locke:~# tail -n 1 /var/log/ntpstats/loopstats.2012
On 2012-11-01, David Woolley wrote:
> David Taylor wrote:
>
>>
>> On a recent restart from cold, the server here took about 15 minutes to
>> get to within 250 microseconds, and about an hour to be within 10
>> microseconds. Ultimately it is within about 3 microseconds.
>
> 3 microseconds of wh
On 2012-11-01, David Woolley wrote:
> David Taylor wrote:
>> On 01/11/2012 08:40, David Woolley wrote:
>>> David Taylor wrote:
>>>
On a recent restart from cold, the server here took about 15 minutes
to get to within 250 microseconds, and about an hour to be within 10
microseco
unruh wrote:
On 2012-11-01, David Woolley wrote:
David Taylor wrote:
On a recent restart from cold, the server here took about 15 minutes to
get to within 250 microseconds, and about an hour to be within 10
microseconds. Ultimately it is within about 3 microseconds.
3 microseconds of what?
unruh wrote:
Interrupt latencies in my measurements tended to be at the one or 2
microsecond level. (drive a pin on the parallel port up, measuring when
The Raspberry Pi is basically a headless PDA, using smart phone type
processors. It is optimised for power consumption, not speed.
_
On 2012-11-01, David Lord wrote:
> David Taylor wrote:
>> On 31/10/2012 21:04, unruh wrote:
>>> On 2012-10-31, Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>> []
NTPD is a "slow starter"! Ideally, you will only start it once and
let it run for a few months.
How slow is a "slow start"?. It can
1 /var/log/ntpstats/loopstats.20121101
56232 50257.989 -0.01426 0.039 0.0 0.000774 4
Yes, I agree with that request, and the kind folks Markus Schöpflin,
Harlan Stenn, Martin Burnicki, and Dave Hart responded to the bug I
reported:
http://bugs.ntp.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2164
You may like
On 01/11/2012 09:27, David Lord wrote:
[]
I lost 7 x pcs Jun-Sept this year after local mains substation
transformer self destructed so my system with GPS is down.
[]
David
Very sorry to hear about that David, a true pain! Perhaps a chance to
replace with some lower-power kit, though?
--
C
On 01/11/2012 13:36, David Woolley wrote:
David Taylor wrote:
[]
That's the offset as stated by NTP.
That's not the time error. Under ideal circumstances, it is several
times higher than the actual error, but with a low value like that, it
could easily be orders of magnitude worse (e.g. if t
On 2012-11-01, David Woolley wrote:
> unruh wrote:
>> On 2012-11-01, David Woolley wrote:
>>> David Taylor wrote:
>>>
On a recent restart from cold, the server here took about 15 minutes to
get to within 250 microseconds, and about an hour to be within 10
microseconds. Ultimatel
David Taylor wrote:
On 01/11/2012 09:27, David Lord wrote:
[]
I lost 7 x pcs Jun-Sept this year after local mains substation
transformer self destructed so my system with GPS is down.
[]
David
Very sorry to hear about that David, a true pain! Perhaps a chance to
replace with some lower-pow
That is one description. Another would be it is a fully functional
linux computer with LAN, HDMI, SVideo, Audio, USB, Serial, and a GPIO
bus with the footprint of a credit card, no moving parts which draws
only 2-3 watts for US$35.
My pi units run various processes such as NTP, web hosting and da
On 2012-11-02, Kennedy, Paul wrote:
> That is one description. Another would be it is a fully functional
> linux computer with LAN, HDMI, SVideo, Audio, USB, Serial, and a GPIO
> bus with the footprint of a credit card, no moving parts which draws
> only 2-3 watts for US$35.
Yes, it is pretty am
19 matches
Mail list logo
