Home

 


Re: NTP servers redundancy Posted on: 19 Jan 2010 21:57:43 GMT

Hal Murray wrote:
> The problem is that IF they give wildly different answers
> (perhaps because one of them is broken) THEN you don't know
> which one is good.

As they say here: IF the sky falls down THEN we all have a blue hat.

Compare it with a RAID-1 disk system. When one disk has an unreadable
sector, the situation is clear: use the sector from the other disk.
When both disks are readable but return different data, you cannot know
which one is correct.

This normally is solved by not checking for that condition, rather than
to use 3 disks and a majority vote (which still could disagree between
all 3 disks).
56518. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56519. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56520. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56521. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56522. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56523. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56524. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56525. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56526. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56527. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56528. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56529. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56530. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56531. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56532. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56533. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56534. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56535. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56536. Re: NTP servers redundancy
56537. Re: NTP servers redundancy