Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2002 00:34:59 +1000 From: Edwin Groothuis <edwin@mavetju.org> To: Casey Scott <casey@nixfusion.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ntpd Message-ID: <20020407003459.H56548@k7.mavetju.org> In-Reply-To: <000701c1dd75$f3b1c330$0601a8c0@nixfusion.com>; from casey@nixfusion.com on Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 09:18:40AM -0500 References: <000701c1dd75$f3b1c330$0601a8c0@nixfusion.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 09:18:40AM -0500, Casey Scott wrote: > The following messages log entries are concerning me. I don't know if I > should interpret it as the system isn't updating it's time properly, or it's > time keeping mechanism is bad. > > Apr 6 00:09:19 spareparts ntpd[12778]: kernel time discipline status 2040 > Apr 6 00:12:43 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -72.208070 s > Apr 6 00:12:43 spareparts ntpd[12778]: kernel time discipline status change > 2041 > Apr 6 00:34:02 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -71.751602 s > Apr 6 00:51:18 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -70.855702 s > Apr 6 01:09:32 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -69.938346 s > Apr 6 01:26:46 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -69.033806 s > Apr 6 01:42:51 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -68.149020 s > Apr 6 02:00:04 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -67.230867 s > Apr 6 02:17:13 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -66.324598 s > Apr 6 02:41:46 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -65.367397 s > Apr 6 02:59:00 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -64.338242 s > Apr 6 03:19:21 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -63.355782 s > Apr 6 03:35:37 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -62.464309 s > Apr 6 03:56:01 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -61.472339 s > Apr 6 04:15:18 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -60.512887 s > Apr 6 04:31:19 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -59.651892 s > Apr 6 04:48:32 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -58.749998 s > Apr 6 05:05:36 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -57.872887 s > Apr 6 05:22:43 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -56.942257 s > Apr 6 05:45:14 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -55.909788 s > Apr 6 06:02:31 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -54.998330 s > Apr 6 06:25:09 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -54.157019 s > Apr 6 06:34:50 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -53.274896 s > Apr 6 06:58:22 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -52.248662 s > Apr 6 07:14:29 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -51.331915 s > Apr 6 07:37:01 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -50.367300 s > Apr 6 07:48:49 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -49.530241 s > Apr 6 08:04:54 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -48.663439 s > Apr 6 08:26:22 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -47.709321 s > Apr 6 08:41:21 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -46.791000 s > Apr 6 09:04:57 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -45.934261 s > Apr 6 09:12:26 spareparts ntpd[12778]: time slew -45.155585 s > > Isn't the system suppose to adjust it's time after the ntp query > provides the correct time? Why does it only seem to be getting better a > second or so at a time? I would appreciate any advice. It is adjusting, the time slew is getting less and less. Because the initial offset is pretty large (70 seconds), it take a while before the system is back. If you want to give it a cold turkey, you could use "ntpdate" which (re)sets the clock to the right value at once. But xntp does it quietly, close to undetectable for the machine and the processes. Edwin -- Edwin Groothuis | Personal website: http://www.MavEtJu.org edwin@mavetju.org | Interested in MUDs? Visit Fatal Dimensions: ------------------+ http://www.FatalDimensions.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020407003459.H56548>