Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 12:03:06 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?Um9nZXIgUGF1IE1vbm7DqQ==?= <roger.pau@citrix.com> To: Karl Pielorz <kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk>, <freebsd-xen@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Xen Guests / NTP best practice? Message-ID: <5299C5EA.3020605@citrix.com> In-Reply-To: <F3CD87E5453C039FABA1901C@study64.tdx.co.uk> References: <960417385DD53D94B3E2DF1C@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk> <5298D244.3070905@citrix.com> <F3CD87E5453C039FABA1901C@study64.tdx.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 30/11/13 11:52, Karl Pielorz wrote: > > > --On 29 November 2013 18:43:32 +0100 Roger Pau Monné > <roger.pau@citrix.com> wrote: > >> There have been some improvements in 10 regarding timekeeping, now >> FreeBSD makes use of the PV timer and PV clock when running under HVM, >> which should be more stable. >> >> Could you try if your issues with ntp are reproducible on 10? > > Sure, I'll give 10 a go. Does the above mean for a VM you don't need to > run ntp? (i.e. it'll stay in sync with dom0 / the XenServer?) - or is > ntp still necessary? Well, if the Dom0 is keep in sync, the DomU clock should also be in sync, but I'm not sure how often does FreeBSD poll the underlying clock, so I would recommend running ntp even in that case (certainly it's not going to hurt). > Likewise do you know if there is any recommended solution for 9.x (which > is the bulk of our VM's). Apart from ntp/ntpdate, I cannot think of anything else. Backporting the changes from 10 is certainly not going to be easy. Roger.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5299C5EA.3020605>