[Pool] Virtualization

Martin Jones martin at jonesey.net
Mon Jul 20 16:25:35 UTC 2015

As another data point, I have been running a stratum 2 pool server in
Digital Ocean's KVM based cloud for a couple  of months now and it performs
well. It stays within 1 ms of the stratum 1 servers it follows. That is
more than good enough for the ntp pool.

I now have it registered in the pool as a 1Gbps server but ntp traffic is
only using about 15% of my monthly transfer allowance of 1TB.

I see no good reason why a service provider should differentiate between
ntp and any other type of IP traffic while there is an agreed allowance
covered by the monthly fee.

Martin Jones
On 20 Jul 2015 16:40, "Michael Rathbun" <time at rabendary.net> wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 01:49:37 -0700, Ask Bjørn Hansen <ask at ntppool.org>
> wrote:
> >But for most actually deployed servers isn’t that almost as true when
> you’re not virtualized? Modern kernels and CPUs do all sorts of tricks to
> save power and divide resources. Most servers aren’t configured to run at
> full speed just in case it makes the time keeping better.
> FWIW, my FreeBSD server instance is running in a VirtualBox VM on a Windows
> 7 platform.  Before I had to consolidate some hardware, it was on its own
> FreeBSD dedicated hardware.  The Windows environment also runs its own NTP
> server (Meinberg).
> Oddly, from the standpoint of measured offsets, the best performer
> according to the monitor is the VM instance; the worst is the Windows
> implementation.
> mdr
> --
>    Sometimes half-ass is exactly the right amount of ass.
>        -- Wonderella
> _______________________________________________
> pool mailing list
> pool at lists.ntp.org
> http://lists.ntp.org/listinfo/pool

More information about the pool mailing list