What is Digg?33 Comments
- bennybertow, on 10/12/2007, -1/+19You rent someone else's web server? Well, maybe some free software would do a better job...
Duggmirror has it: http://duggmirror.com/linux_unix/The_perfect_network_server/
At least the first page... - bola, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12I think Freesoftwaremagazine could do with a "perfect" server ...
- ExSlashdotter, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11dang, wasted all that time in school to get this job as a network admin... should have just read digg first...
If you dont know what you need a server *for*, you dont need to be building a server. Even if its just for your pr0n/iTunes, and it goes double if its for a company. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Except the article was about setting up a server other than a web server... Nice try at being clever though...
- tryangles, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Working in IT for 10 years now, and I have heard about Linux based solutions for the office time and time again. While Linux definitely has its place and purpose, there is a reason why Linux based serving solutions in the SMB office market hasn't made any noise and Microsoft continues it's reign. It's just not practical and eys orvtech, it does suck up time!
- culbeda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I'm afraid it is true for most SMBs. Microsoft's Small Business Server is a great product if you have a small company. It's low-maintenance, can be entirely configured in a couple of hours and it includes the reigning groupware package on the market. Not only that, it includes built in executive reports on the health of the server that can be automatically emailed to the manager/owner. The only serious limitations (up until recently) were the inability to have more than one domain controller or exchange server. Since the R2 product was released (also available as a $300) upgrade, this limitation is gone. This allows for a much better upgrade path for the SMB who needs multiple locations and/or redundancy.
Don't get me wrong, we run a number of Linux based application servers, web servers, VM servers, etc. And they run like a champ. But the problem is that I have to hire a whole different kind of engineer to manage them. And for all the hobbyists out there, I'm amazed at the number of people who THINK they know Linux but don't how to configure network, set up samba or even find a damn file without a frickin' GUI. - webweave, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7@tryangles
Hey, not true at all. I've been setting up servers for over twenty years (started on VAX with DEC-Net) I watched the first windows servers being installed and wondered why someone would install a mail server on a machine that needed to be restarted so often, those machines had to be restarted after changing the video resolution or after swapping a mouse. I bet windows servers still require almost as much rebooting now with all the patching going on. What has changed after all these years is that bad software has become the accepted by business and few are competent enough to blame the real culprit, Microsoft.
I support a number of SMBs using Unix servers. These machines run more on one box than comparable windows product and require less support and less hardware. The average machine is rebooted once a year to install an updated kernel. And my clients don't pay any MS tax or are forced to take upgrades. Most of them are not windows shops but If you run an office of windows machine you want an Unix server just to be safe from any virus brought into the net.
Here is a good one to try "SME Server" http://www.smeserver.org/
"More people are forced to use Windows than any other operating system" - Yoshi39, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5"Just out of curiosity, why on earth do you need copies of all the latest linux ISOs downloaded automatically when you could download them as needed?"
You are actually that naive that you think I use it for linux isos (didn't the " tip you off)?
"Wow, you can download from your house and waste your own bandwidth instead of downloading it from the source... why didn't I think of that!"
Because your stopid ;) My documents don't come from a external source and to install a bittorent client and then wait for the file to download is a lot harder then simply opening up a media player and streaming the media so I can watch it directly without having to wait for it to finish downloading.
"Ok, I get that one... But you could run that on a workstation just as easily."
Well I don't want to keep my workstation on 24/7 and besides I dual boot to be able to play games so if I ran it on my workstation I wouldn't be able to play games while recording a tv-show
"works as a socks proxy enabling me to surf anonymously from anywhere"
"Not any site I admin..."
Could you please tell me ecaxtly how in the world you would be able to differentiate between a cgi proxy over https and a standard web site and/or socks over ssh (ssh -d 8080 myuser@myhost hasn't failed me yet)
"I've got a couple of other ideas for ya...
* Serving a a central repository for your important files (You could call it, oh, I don't know, a "file server")
You didn't get the whole accessing files remotely thing did you?
* Sharing printers
I could if I had a printer ;)
* Email server
Gmail ftw
* Performing backups
Allready do that
* Web / FTP server for something that ISN'T widely available elsewhere
Like documents and the latest "linux isos"
* Remote access to your network (IPSEC or SSL VPN)
Well that is what I do with the
proxy
* ad infinitum
yes that would kind of be included in the "and lots more" ;) - DrDabbles, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6@culbeda
Spoken like a true industry noob / jr. level engineer. Having Exchange and MS Windows as the majority of my background, and having started on Novell Netware, I can tell you that Exchange is not only a resource hog but also a waste for most organizations. ESPECIALLY for small businesses, which are referenced in the article.
A typical Exchange admin with 5-10 years of experience under his/her best can easily demand a salary of 60-100K per year, depending on the organization. So, a small business is either going to have a LOT of admin turnover (bad for business), or have someone completely inept installing their Exchange server on their Active Directory DC's. Either way, they're in for a world of hurt to say the least.
Meanwhile, Linux has no storage limits to its backing store, makes no limitations of client usage (Outlook has to be used for full Exchange integration in most cases), allows webmail usage, is more secure in most default installations, and options are installed on an as-needed basis versus being installed by default.
These days, even the support argument is moot. Companies like RedHat and Novell provide full product support for their distributions, and even Canonical supports Ubuntu for a fee. The days of arguing TCO in favor of Windows are long over. It makes far more sense to have a contractor install a Linux server that "just works" forever in a small business than to hire someone full time to manage the AD/Exchange implementation. - briguymaine, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I was hoping there would be a NSFW label on it.
- gerkin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Perfect, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I wouldn't call a Linux based solution for SMB perfect by any means. If by "perfect" they mean free and based on commodity hardware then sure. To me "perfect" is something that is reasonably priced (doesn't have to be free) that "just works" with little to no fussing with it. Time spent RTFM'ing, editing smb.conf, debugging, fighting with Open Directory, etc, adds up quickly. Suddenly the "perfect" server is a time sucking vortex.
Now for the naysayers that are going to bitch about the above statement take this into consideration. Exactly how long will it take to go from start to finish, with the server attached to your domains as needed and running all the services required flawlessly? Now what happens when you have problems with this box? In the IT business time is money, anyone who has actually _worked_ in the industry knows this. When you are responsible for this stuff in an IT manager's position and you have to account for all the time spent on the "cheap" server your opinions may change.
Now also, this is not a shot at linux. I love linux ... so much that I have a tux tattoo in fact. I am also a former lead developer on the Gentoo project, I have contributed kernel patches over the years, and I still host the 2 very important sites for PPC linux (on a Linux server of course). This still doesn't sway my opinion on Linux as an SMB solution.
For my SMB solutions I use ... wait for it ... OSX Server. Why? Out-of-the-box (after a small wizard at startup) you are attached to your Windows based domains or if needed hosting your own domain controller with it. It has fully integrated services with a great management front end that works either locally or remotely from any Mac that manages ALL your essential services, including all related configurations in one quick spot. Xserve's have redundancy, are built to run 24/7/365 and come with OSX Server pre-installed and ready to run. There are no additional licensing fees required so no hidden costs in that area, unlike MS based solutions. You get hardware and software support from the vendor. And lastly, the pricing is pretty reasonable for what you are getting. - Yoshi39, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well I had an old computer (800mhz p3 and upgraded to 500mb ram) which I decided to turn into a server simply because I figured it would be a good learning experience and that I might someday figure out something useful to do with it. Today I wouldn't have been able to live with out said server because it:
Automatically downloads all the latest "linux isos" via bittorent and rss
Works as a file server enabling me to access all my documents and "linux isos" from anywhere
Works as a myth backend and frontend
works as a socks proxy enabling me to surf anonymously from anywhere
and lots more - clempka, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@WebWeave
I'll vouch for SME. That was my first experience with a Linux distro and I'm still using it for my home server. Basically no setup was needed on pretty antiquated hardware (aside from setting up users and whatnot). - thepxc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Not really. This is specifically _not_ about web servers. They say "you rent someone else's for that.," on the subject of web servers.
- orvtech, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2humm no need for a big box for this, you can set web services, storage, printer server (via usb) on a NSLU take a look at this nice little project http://www.nslu2-linux.org/ i do have mine running gentoo instead of debian and it runs like a charm i even have a test website with DNS, and a bunch of other services running on http://www.orvtech.com there are pictures that will give you an idea of the size of this little $79 tiny box, the only thing stopping me to have my complete website there is my ISP (it sucks most of the time.)
- Ibanezfoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3All that time in "the biz" and still can't figure out how to use the reply feature....
- theurge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm surprised no one has mentioned ClarkConnect yet.
http://www.clarkconnect.com - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Really it depends on what kind of network you need to support, right?
- kerplunk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Not a web server of course, you rent someone else ’s for that."
No. It's called co-location. Dedicated servers are generally a waste of money. - systemplus, on 07/27/2009, -0/+0Hello everyone,
We recently got started with in the web hosting business and we went through all of the reading and server model comparisons before making our choice. All statistics point out that HP Proliant servers are overall the best server line in the market. In particular the HP DL380 G5 has the best data center ratings. To make a long story short, we are currently leasing an HP DL380 G5 running CentOS 5.3 and are using an amazing hosting control panel from www.hmspanel.com. We never imagined that this hosting stuff could be so fun as well as a great business to get involved with. It definitely takes time and dedication but it is so worth it. Anyway, just thought I should share this with someone.
Cheers! - se7en11, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Me too. I just love naked servers!
- nonchallant0819, on 03/27/2008, -0/+0This is a great story... found this one through http://www.google.com
___________________________________
http://www.TopNotchCarpentry.com - nonchallant0819, on 03/27/2008, -0/+0This is a great story... found this one through http://www.google.com
___________________________________
http://www.TopNotchCarpentry.com - culbeda, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Spoken like someone who has never even seen Exchange.
Linux is great and I use it for a number of projects, but having worked with numerous groupware options, I'll keep my Exchange for the time being, thankyouverymuch. - DrKillPatient, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1My ISP (Optonline) allows opening ports 25 and 80 to the home if you subscribe to their "Boost" add-on service. Utilizing DDNS, I have been using qmail-toaster (http://www.qmailtoaster.com/), apache, samba, and cups to run an in-home server. The toughest setup (IMO) is the email server. The folks as qmail-toaster now have a complete free package that supports everything from imap, pop3, multiple domains, AV , SPAM removal, and webmail. The nice thing is configuration and installation intervention by the admin is kept to a minimum. They even have their own distro using (current release) CentOS 5. If you go to the site you will also see all the packages are kept up to date. I have it installed on FC 6 and have really been trouble free for about 4 or 5 months. My only cost was for hardware. For $87 (approx $120 w/shipping), I was able to get a refurb IBM SFF 2.4 ghz P4 w/512 memory. More than enough juice to run a full linux home server. Just jammed a nice big drive into it and away I went. It took me about 2 or 3 days to get everything installed and running. This machine now serves every PC in my house (3 XP Pro desktops and two wireless laptops).
.
With a little effort you can set up a really nice home server for little expense. - schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7For those without the skills (e.g. SMBs), there are Linux-based solutions that are ready (set up in advance) as well. Exchange only had pamphlets (and downtime) going for it, so there's no reason to 'Get the Facts' and fear better soltuions that are both Free and Open Source.
- GliTCH82, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1"Unable to connect to database server"
How ironic. - snotrokit, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4tryangles, I totally agree. I have been in the biz for well over 10 years, with most of that serving the SMB market. No offense, but cubicles give me a rash. In the SMB vertical, the issue splinters. Many SMB owners and decision makers believe all of the marketing that is shoved down their throats in every Inflight, Crains business, and trade rag that they read. It does fall into the "everyone else is doing it" mentality, and of making things as least complex as possible, the term turn key comes into mind. They want something they don't have to worry about, and that they can get support on easily. Most SMB owners are scared to death of their networks. I did everything I could to show them that they had nothing to fear, but I can only do so much. The stories of crappy half assed consultants and blown Exchange upgrades abound. Can't tell you how many trainwrecks I have cleaned up.
Very few SMB owners are willing to strike out on their own with their networks. Now I have had clients that saw the light, saw the license fees, saw the problems with MS (don't get me started on the MS Small Biz products) and listened to ALL of the options with a free and clear mind, and chose the road OTHER than MS. God bless em dangit!
Our shop was the picture of the demographics, 90% MS, 10% Novell and others. All of the guys there were MS toads, I took care of the rest of the world, and rarely worked nights and weekends. :) The problem that I (we) ran into, was a lack of skills. I was the only one that could serve the clients at anything above a basic support request.
I pushed open source and non MS solutions all day long, but there were only so many that would bite. - wbeavis, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Huh? "Cannot find server" Just as I thought, there is no such thing as a perfect server.
- culbeda, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2"Automatically downloads all the latest "linux isos" via bittorent and rss"
Just out of curiosity, why on earth do you need copies of all the latest linux ISOs downloaded automatically when you could download them as needed?
"Works as a file server enabling me to access all my documents and "linux isos" from anywhere"
Wow, you can download from your house and waste your own bandwidth instead of downloading it from the source... why didn't I think of that!
"Works as a myth backend and frontend"
Ok, I get that one... But you could run that on a workstation just as easily.
"works as a socks proxy enabling me to surf anonymously from anywhere"
Not any site I admin...
"and lots more"
God I hope so... because nothing on that list really justified a server so far.
I've got a couple of other ideas for ya...
* Serving a a central repository for your important files (You could call it, oh, I don't know, a "file server")
* Sharing printers
* Email server
* Performing backups
* Web / FTP server for something that ISN'T widely available elsewhere
* Remote access to your network (IPSEC or SSL VPN)
* ad infinitum - mythandros, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Server unreachable. 10 to 1 says his next article is on the perfect web server.
- techwrekfix, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1Looks like they did because it's already downed by Digg effect.
- ripstuntz, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2Lets hope they didnt use this "server" for hosting this web page....
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is