[Pool] time reset

Ask Bjørn Hansen ask at develooper.com
Fri Mar 25 17:41:32 UTC 2011

On Mar 25, 2011, at 10:37, Chuck Swiger wrote:

> Well, take a look at the peerstats-- especially offset and jitter-- and ntpd's rv assessment of the offset, jitter, and stability of the kernel clock it is adjusting.  The worst-case peer jitter if a factor of 4 worse in the VM (2.468 vs. 0.585); best case is a factor of 7 difference: 0.276 vs 0.041; and the jitter for the stratum-1 source using PPS is also a factor of 7 worse for the VM (0.910 vs 0.126). You can repeat the same analysis with offset values and rv stats.

Yes, definitely -- the non virtualized hardware is better at keeping time (and for practically anyone who's nitpicky enough about this to be subscribed here, maybe even significantly).

However, I think the original assertion were:

1) Running ntpd is the best/easiest way to keep time in most/some/popular virtualized environments.

2) The ntpd will keep time "pretty good" -- and certainly good enough to participate in the pool.  (As the other thread that's going right now made clear; part of our job here is to just help deal with the junk and gazillion SNTP clients and really any sort of time that's stop-watch close to real time is plenty good for that).

 - ask

Ask Bjørn Hansen, http://askask.com/

More information about the pool mailing list