As mentioned earlier, I am not very active on this group, but will try harder in the future. Nothing we have to hide it is all in the source code , I just haven't had much time to keep it up to date lately.
I think it is a fair comment and will try to provide more content as soon as possible. Harlan Stenn. I do not like hype. Parts of that doc are reasonable comparisons. GPs do not cost thousands and take 6 months. Terje Mathisen.
Uwe Klein. What accurate world view. It may take 6 months if you are unlucky. William Unruh? This was what ACM Queue was after.
Please view this article that way and not as a scientific paper. I believe you are well aware of synchronisation issues, and I understand your reaction, but again, you were not the targeted audience and for what it is worth, yes, we also have cheap GPS receivers on our office window that took less than 15mn to set up. I am confident you will see the level of hype being much lower. The description of the algorithm you are requesting can be found in several papers. It does describe the algorithm in more details.
It may not deliver all the details you are after or be slightly outdated , but the code publicly available is also there for you to read. It is the ultimate reference after all. My message did not intend to sparkle a heated discussion but instead try to provide honest answers to this group.
Brian Utterback. I haven't come across any true independent one yet, but would be very happy to help anyone who is willing to give it a go. This being said, our methodology relies on 3rd party hardware time reference, and we really try to show ntpd, ptpd I honestly believe that it will be hard to produce fairer results. Consequently, any number quoted should be understood in the particular context of the experiment.
This number is obtained against hardware time reference comparison. However, what matters to us is the robustness of the solution over a long period of time, and not a pure absolute performance over a 1 hour period or less. In all cases, we take extra care to compare different synchronisation daemons under same conditions to ease comparison. For example, this could be useful to improve the timestamps of log files created on different machines and collated for post mortem analysis.
I believe this will give more opportunities to try radclock and make independent assessment and provide feedback. I hope to have time to get started on a similar effort on Linux soon-ish. I will try to take all of this into account in the next iteration. Dave Hart. Separate offset sync from rate sync. IsItemSelectable Object.
ClearContainerStates FrameworkElement. HighlightedIndexChanged Int32, Key. IsIndexSelectable Int ScrollIntoView Object. ScrollIntoView Int ScrollVertical Double. ScrollHorizontal Double. ChangeVisualState Boolean. Identifies the CultureProperty property.
Identifies the EndTimeProperty property. Identifies the Header property. Identifies the HeaderTemplate property. Identifies the IsReadOnly property. Identifies the SelectedTimeProperty property. Use the SelectedItem property. Identifies the StartTimeProperty property. Identifies the TimeIntervalProperty property. Gets or sets the culture. Gets or sets the end time. Gets or sets the header.
Gets or sets the header template. Gets or sets a value indicating whether this instance is read only. Gets or sets the selected time. Gets or sets the start time. Gets or sets the time interval. Indicates whether the selection helper can perform operation or not. Header tag. Is there some kind of workaround for this?
Ivo Telerik team. White ;. Thank you very much. This is a pretty straightforward workaround, so again, I'm forced to say 'Should have thought of it sooner. Answer this question. Drag and drop files here or browse to attach Browse for files to attach
0コメント