Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:16:38 -0800 From: John Webster <jwebster@es.net> To: Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com> Cc: questions@freebsd.org, "Michael W. Lucas" <mwlucas@blackhelicopters.org>, shinny knight <sh1nny_kn1ght@yahoo.com> Subject: Re: timekeeping on jail servers Message-ID: <073F818C772E47BF16B6A94F@vortex.es.net> In-Reply-To: <20071221135129.ee20677e.wmoran@potentialtech.com> References: <20071218165521.GA37529@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> <343753.78466.qm@web44811.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <20071221112303.19619c39.wmoran@potentialtech.com> <7BEE288E7C218E96DB9E8AA0@jw-laptop.dhcp.lbnl.us> <20071221132440.31ded74f.wmoran@potentialtech.com> <62F8888810A130657FBCAF47@vortex.es.net> <20071221135129.ee20677e.wmoran@potentialtech.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--On Friday, December 21, 2007 13:51:29 -0500 Bill Moran <wmoran@potentialtech.com> wrote: > In response to John Webster <jwebster@es.net>: >> > Not generally suitable for cron because it can take longer to slew >> > than it does for the next cron execution to occur, which would then >> > result in multiple ntpdate programs fighting each other (not sure >> > what the effect of this would be). >> >> If I were doing it I would write a script with locking in order >> to ensure multiple jobs don't fight. Simple. > > Umm .... > > At that point, why not just run ntpd? You've basically replaced it > with a script anyway. > My suggestions are based on the OP about ntpd binding to everything. > Besides, it's not that easy. As Chuck pointed out, ntpdate calls > adjtime() and exits, which means an adjustment might already be in > progress when you you call it again. I don't know if ntpdate checks > the return pointer from adjtime() to avoid multiple adjustment > requests. Just out of curiosity, why run it more that once a day? Or for that matter every couple of days?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?073F818C772E47BF16B6A94F>