Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 11:04:43 -0700 From: Brandon Vincent <Brandon.Vincent@asu.edu> To: Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> Cc: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@freebsd.org>, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What IS the right NTP behaviour ? Message-ID: <CAJm4238%2BJCfg7Xb2vMJ4--4uLPXrjn6EJzuc8xJdAeA-aXr7-A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <F6AF299A-17B1-44DF-B025-B8FA0BC833D4@kientzle.com> References: <39337.1442999127@critter.freebsd.dk> <F6AF299A-17B1-44DF-B025-B8FA0BC833D4@kientzle.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:35 AM, Tim Kientzle <tim@kientzle.com> wrote: > One concern I keep running into: Using NTP in VMs that are frequently suspended/resumed. Though I suppose this may be covered by your 'workstation' scenario (just step it after VM resume when you see the large skew). I would assume your hypervisor would sync the clock upon VM events. Does it not? Brandon Vincent
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJm4238%2BJCfg7Xb2vMJ4--4uLPXrjn6EJzuc8xJdAeA-aXr7-A>