On Thu, 01 Dec 2022 03:30:52 -0500, time-nuts-request@lists.febo.com
wrote:
Re: time-nuts Digest, Vol 223, Issue 37
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 01:49:42 -0800
From: Hal Murray halmurray@sonic.net
Subject: [time-nuts] Re: What everyday uses are there for accurate
clocks?
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
time-nuts@lists.febo.com
Cc: "Dr. David Kirkby" drkirkby@kirkbymicrowave.co.uk, Hal Murray
halmurray@sonic.net
Message-ID: <20221130094942.6D54D28C201@107-137-68-211.lightspeed.sntc
ca.sbcglobal.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Dr. David Kirkby said:
I can't see how knowing who posted what first on Facebook, Instagram etc
affects the user experience, when differences in time are any less than a
second.
It doesn't make any difference to the people which of two
really-close events happens first.
What does matter is that separate data centers agree. It's a data
base issue
rather than a user interface issue.
Google put atomic clocks in all their data centers.
Spanner: TrueTime and external consistency
https://cloud.google.com/spanner/docs/true-time-external-consistency
Many years ago, it wasn't quite uncommon for Unix shops to get into trouble
because the time on their systems weren't consistent. I forget the
details.
It involved NFS - Network File Systems and time on the NFS server being
different from the time on the workstation used to edit a file.
This looks like a good summary:
why does NFS require synchronized system clocks?
https://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/549550/why-does-nfs-require-synchronized-system-clocks
On a civilian weather-radar project many decades ago, the programming
team started to experience mysterious lossage of code updates,
causing general chaos, with much random blame-shifting. It turned
out that NFS was the culprit, for an unexpected reason.
NFS and SCCS were designed back in the days of small programs and
small programming teams. NFS an/or SCCS used timestamps to infer
update order. (Don't recall exactly how SCCS and NFS were fit
together back then - it was project-developed.) When the programming
team was about 100 people, we started to experience mysterious
lossage of updates, causing general chaos. In those days, UNIX
timestamps had one-second granularity. With ten programmers,
collisions were unlikely enough that the lossage was not noticed.
With a hundred programmers, collisions were common and the lossage
was devastating.
The solution was to provide a common atomic sequence number generator
and use these numbers to sequence-stamp code updates.
For the record, the basic source of time in those UNIX boxes was the
local power line frequency, 60 Hz in the US or 50 Hz elsewhere. Use
of the local power-line cycle interrupt for time-stamping would have
reduced the lossage rate, but could not completely eliminate
collisions. GPS was not available then.
Joe