Live data from Hacker News

Leap second hiatus

fanf.dreamwidth.org

31–40 of 117 posts

Re: Leap second hiatus

#31
post #16

What causes changes in the rate of rotation of the earth?

Earthquakes, nuclear explosions, tectonic plate activity, the moon slowly moving away from us amongst other causes.

I don't think nuclear explosions belong in that list. They have tremendous power, but very limited energy on a planetary scale. Do you have a source that says otherwise?

Re: Leap second hiatus

#32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those algorithms should be using TAI, not UTC. Any distributed system that breaks in the presence of leap seconds is necessarily poorly designed. The fact that any non-UI code uses any time standard except TAI is a very unfortunate historical mistake that will hopefully be cleaned up over the next few years. Thankfully since 2013, Linux kernel has supported TAI.

> Thankfully since 2013, Linux kernel has supported TAI. Only with the correct ntpd configuration [1]. For that reason it is impossible to rely on that API in end-user libraries. [1] https://superuser.com/questions/1156693/is-there-a-way-of-ge...

And from what I can tell it doesn't work with systemd-timesyncd, which many linux systems are using now.

Re: Leap second hiatus

#34
Just because everyone seems to be complaining about leap seconds: I think they are the right solution for the problem. I do hope we won't need a negative leap second, that would break a lot of code for sure.

Time related stuff sure is messy.

Re: Leap second hiatus

#35
Re: the 'negative second' fears - in usual operation, NTP adjusts your local machine downward all the ... time.

There's really nothing to be afraid of; a few services would implement some skew, the rest of us would get NTP updates and life continues.

Re: Leap second hiatus

#36
post #33

Monotonically rising time with a negative leapsecond...

Actually the negative leap second is "more monotonic" than the regular one. Normally a leap second adds an extra second (58, 59, 60, 00), but a negative leap second skips one (58, 00).

Uniquely specifying the four times in the first sequence as UNIX timestamps isn't strictly possible, but it is possible with negative leap seconds.

Re: Leap second hiatus

#37
post #15

Can we take a longer hiatus on leap seconds, maybe 79 years or so, and only update once a century? Local apparent noon being off by 30 seconds or so has approximately zero impact on my daily life, but stupid things in datetime libraries do occasionally have impact. If we can’t throw off the oppression of UTC and greet TAI as liberators, at least adjust the clock at regular, very infrequent dates.

Besides the sibling comment that some things rely on the days being synced to rotation, doing it once a century would pretty much guarantee that only the most obsessively robust systems would take it into consideration when being built. We'd be giving ourselves a Y2k-equivalent to deal with every century. Maybe that's not the biggest deal in the world, but I still remember the last viscerally and we're already a fift…

I don't see a single thing different between leap hour and DST switch. Especially since Europe wants to cancel DST it wont even be something which happens periodically forever

Re: Leap second hiatus

#38
post #16

What causes changes in the rate of rotation of the earth?

The angular momentum of the "earth system" is constant [1]. The variation in angular velocity of the solid earth can be ascribed to change in the angular momentum carried by oceans and atmosphere. These changes can be due to change in velocity (winds, currents) or moment of inertia (moisture in atmosphere).

[1] If we ignore friction due to tidal forces from moon and sun (which is valid on these time-scales), the "earth system" is not affected by any non-central forces and so the angular momentum is constant.

Re: Leap second hiatus

#39
post #15

Can we take a longer hiatus on leap seconds, maybe 79 years or so, and only update once a century? Local apparent noon being off by 30 seconds or so has approximately zero impact on my daily life, but stupid things in datetime libraries do occasionally have impact. If we can’t throw off the oppression of UTC and greet TAI as liberators, at least adjust the clock at regular, very infrequent dates.

Besides the sibling comment that some things rely on the days being synced to rotation, doing it once a century would pretty much guarantee that only the most obsessively robust systems would take it into consideration when being built. We'd be giving ourselves a Y2k-equivalent to deal with every century. Maybe that's not the biggest deal in the world, but I still remember the last viscerally and we're already a fift…

"If it hurts, do it more often" — Martin Fowler

Re: Leap second hiatus

#40
post #2

> NTP or kernel timekeeping code expects that it will be an appalling shitshow. I’m curious what systems would catastrophically fall apart if time went back one second?

A negative leap second (the appalling shitshow from the article) would make us skip a second, though. Going back one second is what generally happens now when a Linux box does the "inserting leap second" thing. It goes from 23:59:59.999999 to 23:59:59.000000, then runs that whole second again. You get to 23:59:59.999999 again, and then you finally roll over to 00:00:00.000000. From the perspective of the typical time…

> Having lived through systems going backwards some 17 seconds due to a botched NTP-GPS appliance config

Well then, it really was botched. I was running an off-line hodge podge of 50 or so RH7.3 + Win2K systems back in 2002, where I had to manually fix the few second drift every couple of months, and the RH machines all slewed faster/slower to adapt, non ever went backward or jumped forward (Don't remember how the Win2K handled it; They weren't mission critical and I didn't care much).

Post reply on HN