[comp.sys.ibm.pc] Need TST? to update clock with ATNX

fountain@jimi.cs.unlv.edu (John Fountain, Jr.) (10/08/87)

Help! I am running MS-DOS 3.1 with ATNX 1.61 from Alloy.
The PC-SLAVE II card allows me to connect a slave terminal
to the ATNX 'hard disk access' software.  The problem lies
in ATNX allowing the system clock to lose 15 minutes per
day...

Alloy supplies a utility called UPTIME which is a TSR that
adds small increments to the system clock to account for the
'time-sliced' losses.  IT DOESN'T WORK!  It updates the clock
in VERY erradic fashion.

Does anyone in netland have TSR that might run ?


beFUDled

jfj

(if e-mail doesn''t work I can be reached at (702)367-3247 or by
3906 Calle Tereon
Las Vegas, Nevada 89103)
gracias in advance

acm@bu-cs.BU.EDU (ACM) (10/11/87)

In article <660@jimi.cs.unlv.edu> fountain@jimi.cs.unlv.edu (John Fountain, Jr.) writes:
>Help! I am running MS-DOS 3.1 with ATNX 1.61 from Alloy.
>The PC-SLAVE II card allows me to connect a slave terminal
>to the ATNX 'hard disk access' software.  The problem lies
>in ATNX allowing the system clock to lose 15 minutes per
>day...
>
>Alloy supplies a utility called UPTIME which is a TSR that
>adds small increments to the system clock to account for the
>'time-sliced' losses.  IT DOESN'T WORK!  It updates the clock
>in VERY erradic fashion.

Not only is the clock erratic normally, but if you put the host into
"server only" mode (the command QM does this) the clock will GAIN
about an hour a day.  I spoke with Alloy about this last March and the
answer they gave me was to move to NTNX.  We did; the clock
maintenance software in NTNX is much, much more reliable and overall
system performance appears to be quite better.

Also you might notice that doing time requests at pretty short time
intervals on the slave cards causes some pretty hairy results.
Apparently the slaves always query the host for the time; this
surprized me!

Sorry I can't offer you a solution to your problem.  This is just more
commentary.

jim frost
madd@bucsb.bu.edu