Choice of box as server

[ChrisRChamberlain]

Hi all

Have a client who want to investigate hosting his own website.

Before purchasing any server hardware, he can use one of 2 redundant boxes.

1100 MHz with 7200 rpm hard drive, XP Pro, 512 meg RAM
2400 MHz with 5400 rpm hard drive, XP Pro, 512 meg RAM

Only software running will be WAMP and Cerberus FTP Server.

Without formal testing, which is likely to perform better?

TIA

FAQ184-2483​

Chris
PDFcommander.com
motrac.co.uk

 

[Sympology]

Neither. XP is not suitable for web hosting due to limited number of concurent connections.

Also to little memory.

Why not put the 7200 drive into the 2.4 pc?

Dare I say it, it may be better to take the plunge and go for a Linux setup (and I'm no Linux user)

Most people spend their time on the "urgent" rather than on the "important."

 

[kmcferrin]

If he's talking about hosting a publicly available web site, the biggest question is "How much traffic will that site generate?" I agree that XP Pro is not a suitable platform for hosting a web server for anything other than simple development. Unless your web site is highly I/O dependent (i.e., relying on databases) then the hard disk is probably not particularly important. The more important aspects willl be memory (for managing a large number of connections and caching content) and CPU.

If your client is considering something that will generate significant traffic then he's probably better off going with a commercial host. If you shop around there are plenty of inexpensive hosting companies out there, with the benefit of them being experts in web hosting. Your customer wouldn't have to worry about any of the security implications of running their own web servers or eating up their own bandwidth.

________________________________________
CompTIA A+, Network+, Server+, Security+
MCTS:Hyper-V
MCTS:System Center Virtual Machine Manager
MCSE:Security 2003
MCITP:Enterprise Administrator

 

[ChrisRChamberlain]

Sympology

Thanks for your reply.

I appreciate the problem of the suitability of using XP Pro as a server, but the initial traffic in the evaluation phase would be within the limits imposed by the operating system.

Putting the 7200 rpm drive into the 2.4 MHz is an option, but there is an undesirable cost element involved.

Putting aside the shortage of RAM, which of the two options is likely to perform the best?

FAQ184-2483​

Chris
PDFcommander.com
motrac.co.uk

 

[gbaughma]

Take the one with the faster processor, and don't run XP. Run Linux instead.

I run a linux server at home... it never gives me any problems, and it's on a dual 733MHz box with 1GB of RAM.

Windows is, IMHO, bloatware when you just want to serve up pages/email/ftp.


Just my 2¢

"What the captain doesn't realize is that we've secretly replaced his Dilithium Crystals with new Folger's Crystals."

--Greg

http://parallel.tzo.com

 

[kmcferrin]

I would go with the faster CPU, unless there's enough traffic that you're constantly hitting the page file to meet memory requirements.

________________________________________
CompTIA A+, Network+, Server+, Security+
MCTS:Hyper-V
MCTS:System Center Virtual Machine Manager
MCSE:Security 2003
MCITP:Enterprise Administrator

 

[gbaughma]

Wait a second.....

WAMP?

WAMP = Windows Apache, MySql, PHP

All included in LINUX. Without the Windows overhead.

I re-read the post, because I thought "Oh, what is WAMP? Maybe it's a custom windows application"... then I found the answer. :S



Just my 2¢

"What the captain doesn't realize is that we've secretly replaced his Dilithium Crystals with new Folger's Crystals."

--Greg

http://parallel.tzo.com

 

[ChrisRChamberlain]

Thanks to all for your replies and comments.

Client has since found a 1300 MHz box with 1 gig RAM, 7200 rpm drive and a trashed operating system.

Intend to install Ubuntu 8.10 Server on this option as hopefully the additional RAM combined with the higher drive speed will be more beneficial than the higher CPU speed.

Suspect aged hardware won't support current Ubuntu version.

FAQ184-2483​

Chris
PDFcommander.com
motrac.co.uk

 

[Sympology]

look for a LAMP instalation.

Most people spend their time on the "urgent" rather than on the "important."

 

[ChrisRChamberlain]

Apart from LAMP, any other servers needed to enable box to act as a HTTP server?

FAQ184-2483​

Chris
PDFcommander.com
motrac.co.uk

 

[gbaughma]

When you install Linux, just tell it to install those services. It will ask you if you want to install ummm... internet services or servers or something. I don't remember. I haven't had to install Linux in quite a while, because I never have any problems with it.

And I don't see why Ubuntu won't run on that box.

Although I'm personally a Fedora fan.



Just my 2¢

"What the captain doesn't realize is that we've secretly replaced his Dilithium Crystals with new Folger's Crystals."

--Greg

http://parallel.tzo.com