On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 2:16 AM, David J Taylor < david-tay...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> No, I haven't replaced the crystal. I was hoping to see how well it > worked without. > No better than any other system given similar environments. > Would it work any better than the Raspberry Pi cards I am using today > There are two functions: 1) The very high resolution discipline of the system clock. Doing this today one would use a capture or system that can be externally clocked. 2) Time transfer. That's not going to be any better than any other non-PTP system. The limitation is the network not the server. So the answer to the "better than" question is probably not enough to matter. Either in offset or jitter. > (which seem considerably worse with the new tickless kernel than the > self-compiled non-tickless one I was using before)? > Implementation issues. > Would it work better than a server running Linux? > No. > The net4501 had a good reputation in its time. > But not for reasons recently discussed on ntp:questions. See item 2 above. > The non-standard implementation of NTPns is putting me off. > I don't believe NTPns is better enough at timekeeping to fret about. I've avoided asking why you're doing this because -- to misquote Yoda -- "Do nor do not, there is only try" But if you're not switching out the system clock it doesn't really seem like either a time-nut or ntp-nut project. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.