Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use i_info() when time jumps forward by <0.2 seconds #231

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

andrew-sayers
Copy link

Small time jumps due to NTP corrections are common. Warning the user too frequently trains them to ignore this message, ignoring potentially serious time jumps.

Reduce the level to info if the jump is less than 0.2 seconds, so they can opt out of the common messages but still see the problems.

Small time jumps due to NTP corrections are common.  Warning the user too frequently trains them to ignore this message, ignoring potentially serious time jumps.

Reduce the level to `info` if the jump is less than 0.2 seconds, so they can opt out of the common messages but still see the problems.
@sirainen
Copy link
Contributor

sirainen commented Jan 4, 2025

Isn't ac502af here? Also why <0.2s specifically? It already ignores <0.1s jumps. I don't see a benefit logging 0.1s .. 0.2s with info-log. Might as well not log them at all, i.e. increase:

#define IOLOOP_TIME_MOVED_FORWARDS_MIN_USECS (100000)

@andrew-sayers
Copy link
Author

I was looking to make the lowest-impact change I could, but silencing the message altogether works for me.

I get an average of about one message per day (sometimes nothing for a week, sometimes several in a day) warning about the clock moving forward by up to about 0.1001 seconds. I'm running dovecot on an old Raspberry Pi, so that's probably a decent upper-bound.

0.2 seconds seemed like a round number for the patch above, but if we're silencing the message altogether, how about doing #define IOLOOP_TIME_MOVED_FORWARDS_MIN_USECS (100100) and bumping it again if anyone else has a problem?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants