[ntp:questions] NTP vs chrony comparison (Was: oscillations in ntp clock synchronization)

Unruh unruh-spam at physics.ubc.ca
Sat Jan 26 21:35:29 UTC 2008

mayer at ntp.isc.org (Danny Mayer) writes:

>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.

Well, no to both. ntpd steps, which hardly obeys that limit, and the reason
ntp takes such a long time is that it has an intergration loop with such a
long time constant. If it put its mind to it and used the 500PPM to get rid
of a 50ms offset, it would only take 200 sec, not 3 hours.
It slowly jacks the PPM to 400 or so and then slowly drops it again below
the nominal. This is done to avoid trashing or instability.


More information about the questions mailing list