Return-Path: Received: (qmail 88781 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2004 12:03:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ptb-mxscan02.plus.net) (212.159.14.236) by ptb-mailstore04.plus.net with SMTP; 13 Feb 2004 12:03:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 31035 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2004 12:03:13 -0000 X-Filtered-by: Plusnet (hmail v1.01) X-Spam-detection-level: 11 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from ptb-mxcore02.plus.net (212.159.14.216) by ptb-mxscan02.plus.net with SMTP; 13 Feb 2004 12:03:12 -0000 Received: from post.thorcom.com ([193.82.116.20]) by ptb-mxcore02.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1Arc2K-0007v9-8r for dave@picks.force9.co.uk; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:03:12 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 X-Fake-Domain: majordom Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1Arc1a-0003eB-ST for rs_out@blacksheep.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:02:26 +0000 Received: from [195.101.39.227] (helo=GWOUT.thalesgroup.com) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1Arc1a-0003dK-DV for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:02:26 +0000 X-Fake-Domain: thalescan.corp.thales Received: from thalescan.corp.thales (200.3.2.3) by GWOUT.thalesgroup.com (NPlex 6.5.026) id 402BB69900010BA5 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:02:34 +0100 X-Fake-Domain: tccplex.tcc.thomson-csf.com Received: from tccplex.tcc.thomson-csf.com ([200.3.1.11]) by thalescan with InterScan Messaging Security Suite; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:01:36 +0100 X-Fake-Domain: NODALNET.clb.tcfr.thales Received: from NODALNET.clb.tcfr.thales (146.11.5.4) by tccplex.tcc.thomson-csf.com (NPlex 6.5.026) id 402CA1AE00000FA1 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:02:33 +0100 Received: by NODALNET.clb.tcfr.thales with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:01:36 +0100 X-Bad-Message-ID: no DNS (argos.clb.tcfr.thales) Message-ID: <8840D182F8BB7540B173D2B1FA0CA9AB018AE33A@argos.clb.tcfr.thales> From: Jean-Louis.RAULT@fr.thalesgroup.com To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 13:02:14 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Subject: RE: LF: Timing GPS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=5.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.60 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PN-SPAMFiltered: yes X-Spam-Rating: 2 > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Alan Melia [mailto:Alan.Melia@btinternet.com] > Envoyé : vendredi 13 février 2004 12:25 > À : rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org > Objet : Re: LF: Timing GPS > > > Hello again Jean-Louis. I had thought about that ( software > clock drift > dependent on cpu usage) and wondered whether it would be > possible to force > the software clock to sync with the hardware clock at regular > intervals > (say 30 mins) using the scheduler. This could possibly be run > behind the > capture program if not incorporated into it ?? I am not sufficiently > knowledgable about windows to now how to do it. > > Cheers de Alan G3NYK > alan.melia@btinternet.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: 13 February 2004 08:59 > Subject: RE: LF: Timing GPS > > > Hi all > > Please keep in mind that Windows operating systems are very poor "time > keepers". > They drift very quickly, depending on the programs you are running. > A drift of one second up to one minute per day is not > uncommon (specially > with "data crunchers" softwares like real time FFT computing)! > I'm not talking about the drift of the PC hardware clock > itself which is > quite good (the time base xtal oscillator drifts around 2 s > per month on my > own computer), but from the Windows time management. > It seems that the time management on the Windows multitask OS > has a very low > priority ... > I verified this on Windows 95, Windows 98 and Windows Me. > Any other experience with other operating systems ? > > 73 de Jean-Louis F6AGR > > > > > > >