> Le 16 févr. 2017 à 13:05, Mike Cook <michael.c...@sfr.fr> a écrit :
>
>
>> Le 16 févr. 2017 à 04:09, MLewis <mlewis...@rogers.com> a écrit :
>>
>> On 15/02/2017 1:17 PM, Chris Albertson wrote:
>>> Why set up a dedicated NTP server if you only have two computers that will
>>> use it? ... You could save some money and just run NTP on the two
>>> computers. ... NTP is almost zero load on the CPU and the best thing is the
>>> NTP accuracy is not effected by CPU load…
>
> This is not strictly true in all scenarios as the NTP thread has to be able
> to get to a cpu to be able to do its thing. Higher priority, or CPU intensive
> threads can starve it.
>
< snipped>
>
> The test is not supposed to be an all inclusive and YMMV.
> There are probably methods, such a configuring detected cores for NTP ,
> increasing its priority, and maybe increasing the poll interval that can
> mitigate the effect.
detected should have been dedicated of course
- damned spell checker
> I’ll try that to see what I get.
>
As I thought the issue can be worked around by tweaking scheduling and cpu
affinity.
When I fixed ntpd on cpu 0 and put it in the fifo real time scheduling class
there was no change in reported clock offsets when running the same test load.
>>
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who
have not got it. »
George Bernard Shaw
_______________________________________________
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.
