On Mon, 7 May 2007 18:35:13 -0500 Jeffrey Goldberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On May 7, 2007, at 5:02 PM, RW wrote: > > > If the time error is zeroed by ntpdate, and there's a drift-file, I > > don't see that the actual drift value makes much difference. I > > suspect that any quartz clock is overkill. > > As someone already mentioned, drift data doesn't really solve the > problem if the amount of drift varies (often with temperature, and > sometimes dramatically with sleep). The clock on my wife's G5 iMac > seems to be erratic, but I haven't (and won't) bother to investigate > further. If her system is up to 2 seconds off for a bit after > waking from sleep, so be it. (If I ever start using kerberos around > the house, I will have to address that.) > > If a machine is up for months, ntpdate may have been run in the > distant past, so you can still a fair amount of error. > > ntpd is really a very light weight thing. When things are ticking > over nicely, it may make just one query every few hours and still > keep very good time. I was questioning the need for a low-drift system clock on a machine that *is* running ntpd, not the need for ntpd. _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
