Date:	Fri, 27 Oct 2000 08:02:26 +0200
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id:	<7458-Fri27Oct2000080225+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.5h
In-reply-to:	<8ta628$4t7$1@nnrp1.deja.com> (dcasale@my-deja.com)
Subject:	Re: Elapsed time?
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1001024093648 DOT 24828K-100000 AT is> <8ta628$4t7$1 AT nnrp1 DOT deja DOT com>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> From: dcasale AT my-deja DOT com
> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
> Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2000 21:00:59 GMT
> >
> > > My program is, obviously, extremely disk-intensive.  I'm caching
> > > reads and writes with separate 5MB buffers.  Could this cause the
> > > problem?
> >
> > No disk I/O should ever affect the system clock.
> 
> Are you absolutely sure about that?

Yes.  The timer interrupt has the highest priority, and so should not
be affected by almost anything else.

> I've noticed the WinBloze clock slowing down sometimes, when there's
> a lot of disk activity or processor-intensive activity going on.

Is that the same machine, or did you try this on several different
systems?  If that's the same machine, my first suspicion would be
either some optional software that you have installed there, or a
hardware problem.

FWIW, I run Windows 9X for days and weeks on end without rebooting,
running disk-intensive and CPU-intensive program on it all the time,
and I don't see any visible time slow-down.

> What's even more interesting is that the clock is slow after the
> program finishes, but a system reboot resets the clock to the proper
> time.

That's because rebooting causes the system clock to be initialized
from the CMOS clock, which is autonomous and doesn't suffer from the
usual factors that can slow down the system clock.

- Raw text -