[ntp:questions] Meinberg NTP monitor, silly question

Richard B. Gilbert rgilbert88 at comcast.net
Tue Dec 22 19:42:45 UTC 2009

unruh wrote:
> On 2009-12-22, Richard B. Gilbert <rgilbert88 at comcast.net> wrote:
>> David J Taylor wrote:
>>> "Richard B. Gilbert" <> wrote in message 
>>> news:ZJydnVuvufm1Wa3WnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d at giganews.com...
>>> []
>>>>> You will find that for the best performance, the NTP PC needs to be 
>>>>> left running, as initial settling is not quick.
>>>> "Not quick" is an extreme understatement!  It takes about 30 minutes 
>>>> to get a "reasonable approximation".  It can take ten to twelve hours 
>>>> to stabilize with the best possible approximation of the time.  Once 
>>>> there it's good for as long as you can keep the power on and the 
>>>> temperature reasonably stable.
>>> Richard,
>>> On one LAN-synced system it took bout 90 minutes to get to within its 
>>> normal offset range, and about the same on a Windows-XP system with a 
>>> GPS reference clock.  On the Windows-7 system, with a GPS ref-clock, it 
>>> took about 5 hours.
>>> I do wish there were some way of speeding this up - a variable loop 
>>> bandwidth or something like that.
>> Lots of luck.  My understanding is that it can't be done without loss of 
>> accuracy and/or stability.
> Nonsense. chrony does it, without loss of accuracy (chrony is about 3
> times as accurate as ntp is) or stability. It will correct a few hundred
> second initial error in far less time than ntp takes for a .01 sec error,
> and without stepping. 

Then why don't you use chrony and stop bugging us?  If it can replace 
NTPD under most common scenarios for normal and emergency operation and 
do a better job, I'm sure that it will eventually replace NTPD.  Does 
anyone see that happening yet?

More information about the questions mailing list