[Beowulf] IEEE 1588 (PTP) - a better cluster clock?
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Patrick Geoffray patrick at myri.comFri Jul 20 13:07:09 PDT 2007
- Previous message: [Beowulf] IEEE 1588 (PTP) - a better cluster clock?
- Next message: [Beowulf] IEEE 1588 (PTP) - a better cluster clock?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hi Patrick, Patrick Ohly wrote: > That's all for now (and probably enough stuff, too ... although perhaps > you prefer detailed emails over bullet items on a PowerPoint > presentation). So what do you think? Since you are asking, here is my personal opinion: I don't think there is a need for a system-wide PTP service. NTP's precision is good enough for comparing log and other administration needs. The only requirement for a high precision/high accuracy global clock reference that I would consider legitimate is for tracing tools (that's where you come from). In this case, why not running NTP as part of the tracing environment ? You could say that it would be useful to factorize this functionality so that it can be shared by several tracing libraries. I don't think it's worth the effort, as one rarely uses two different tracing tool at the same time. I don't know enough about PTP to comment on the implementation, except that relying on multicast is a bad, bad idea. It does not scale and it's very unreliable under load (induces contention if reliable). Patrick
- Previous message: [Beowulf] IEEE 1588 (PTP) - a better cluster clock?
- Next message: [Beowulf] IEEE 1588 (PTP) - a better cluster clock?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list
