[ntp:questions] "ntpd -q" is slow compared to ntpdate

Unruh unruh-spam at physics.ubc.ca
Wed Oct 15 02:32:40 UTC 2008

eugenemil at sbcglobal.net writes:

>The following argument can be made in favor of running ntpd -gq:
>Suppose you want to reduce the time offset to (nearly) zero as rapidly
>as possible on start-up and this causes you to be dissatisfied with
>the behavior of ntpd when it it starts up and calculates an initial
>offset of slightly less than the default step threshold of 128ms.  If
>you run "ntpd -g" with something like "tinker step 0.001" in the
>configuration file to insure that a step will occur on start-up, then
>you are stuck with that step threshold indefinitely. You might want to
>run  ntpd twice -- the first time in "one-shot" mode with the tinker
>in the config, and the second time with a different configuration file
>lacking the tinker.

>Gene Miller

date -s "Jan 1 2000 10:15:00"
ntpd -g
should do it. the first ensures that the time is way way way off and a step
will definitely occur. The
second does a step to the correct time. 

More information about the questions mailing list