Hi again,
Well, meanwhile there were many very strong arguments that saving the last known timestamp when shutting down or rebooting is a really good idea for consistent, monotonic timestamps.
Anyway, I never doubted this the tiniest piece.![:D]( "Very Happy")
Still, I do not see a reason why keeping the highest of all timesyncd's efforts, namely storing a timestamp any minute, active for mitigating the most improbable (and generally harmful) corner case, namely hard and ungraceful resets.
That's the famous pareto trap - investing 95% of the effort for mastering the last 5% of perceived quality. Which use case really has a profit from that?
I would still conclude that it's safe and reasonable to reduce that period to one hour instead of one minute.
Well, meanwhile there were many very strong arguments that saving the last known timestamp when shutting down or rebooting is a really good idea for consistent, monotonic timestamps.
Anyway, I never doubted this the tiniest piece.
Still, I do not see a reason why keeping the highest of all timesyncd's efforts, namely storing a timestamp any minute, active for mitigating the most improbable (and generally harmful) corner case, namely hard and ungraceful resets.
That's the famous pareto trap - investing 95% of the effort for mastering the last 5% of perceived quality. Which use case really has a profit from that?
I would still conclude that it's safe and reasonable to reduce that period to one hour instead of one minute.
Statistics: Posted by hundertvolt — Sat Nov 08, 2025 8:17 pm