[ntp:questions] NTP vs chrony comparison (Was: oscillations in ntp clock synchronization)
David L. Mills
mills at udel.edu
Sat Jan 26 20:52:21 UTC 2008
Unless the computer clock intrinsic frequency error is huge, the only
time the 500-PPM kicks in is with a 100-ms step transient and poll
interval 16 s. The loop still works if it hits the stops; it just can't
drive the offset to zero.
Danny Mayer wrote:
> Unruh wrote:
>>"David L. Mills" <mills at udel.edu> writes:
>>>Reading your claims literally, chrony would have to slew the clock
>>>considerably greater than the 500 PPM provided by the standard Unix
>>>adjtime() system call. Please explain how it does that.
>>Using the Linux adjtimex system call which has the ability to change the
>>ticksize which gives much greater than 500PPM slew rate for the clocks.
>>( Up to 100000PPM, although that is never used. ) And as I understand it,
>>your handling of leap seconds in ntp also uses far greater than 500PPM slew rates.
> No, ntpd deliberately limits frequency changes to 500 PPM. That's hard
> coded. You need to avoid using anything greater than that as Dave has
> explained. That would be the reason why it taks ntpd longer to bring the
> clock back to the right time.
More information about the questions