Linux servers work just fine
Summary: I may not know exactly what you're trying to do with your servers, but I do know that, no matter what operating system you're running, you need to know servers to be successful.
Linux servers can soar.
I don't know exactly what happened with fellow ZDNet writer David Gewirtz's Linux server, but I do know it was bad. Really bad.
He's been having constant trouble updating and managing his software. The final straw was when he tried to install some updates to his hosted CentOS, a Red Hat Enterprise Linux clone, and it blew up on him.
His conclusion was that you need to be a Linux guru to keep a simple Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP/Python/Perl (LAMP) up and running properly. I beg to differ.
Now, at this point, David would point that I am a Linux guru. True, I am. And, as it happens I also run a CentOS server at a hosting company for my own Web site, email server, and some LAMP applications such as WordPress. So, yes, I also know a lot about his particular server. But, do you know how much time—not trouble, just time—I've spent managing that system in the last year? According to my system logs: it's been about an hour.
That's not because I'm that good, it's because my hosting company and I set it up right the first time and I haven't had to spare a minute's thought to it, never mind any Linux expertise, since then. My Linux wizard server admin. skills, such as they are, go to my experimental servers, not my production systems. My work servers just run and run and … you get the idea.
That said, if you're going to run a server, any server, you may not need to be a wizard, but you do need to know the basics of your server and your applications. That's true regardless of your operating system.
Reading more closely, part of his problem seems to be that he's confusing operating systems. He talks about how using Ubuntu package instructions won't work on CentOS or Fedora. Well, no, they wouldn't. They're different distributions, different operating systems. It's like using Windows Server 2003 instructions on Windows 2008 R2. Sometime, it will work; sometimes, you're going to end up in a big mess.
I'm also not sure why he's spending so much time with manual setting up and tuning programs and configurations. Sure, just like with Windows Server, there are times a job is best done by getting down to the nitty-gritty with Linux .conf files and shell programming or Windows' .ini files and PowerShell scripts. But, in my experience, on both modern Windows and Linux servers, you seldom need to go to such a low-level these days.
The immediate cause of his problem that caused everything to go haywire was a GNOME desktop update. OK, if you're not a Linux expert, I can't expect you to know many of us who are Linux experts, like say Linus Torvalds, that GNOME 3.x isn't a desirable update to begin with. On the other hand, anyone who knows servers knows that there's no good reason to update am already working desktop interface---or any other program that's chugging along without any trouble---on a server. There's just no “win” in updating working server programs to justify the time.
Gewirtz thinks his life will be easier with Windows Server. Maybe it will be. I hope that it is. Perhaps his hosting company, which sounds a bit clueless about Linux, may know how to properly maintain Windows. But, I can tell you now, since I'm also something of a Windows Server expert, that Windows Server 2008 R2, the newest and best of Microsoft's server line, can also throw fits.
It may shock those of you who think I'm pro-Linux because of some irrational love for the operating system when I say that I think Windows Server 2008 R2 is a great server operating system. Indeed, it's ideal for many business situations.
I don't think Windows is a good fit, though, as a network edge server. If that's what David has in mind---and it usually is when people are talking about LAMP servers at hosting companies—I think he has a better choice.
That choice is to find a hosting company with a clue on how to update his servers and can give him the kind of support he needs. If you find yourself needing to add, tune, or modify programs a lot on your server you need a competent server administrator no matter what operating system you're running.
Related Stories:
Why I’ve finally had it with my Linux server and I’m moving back to Windows
Windows Server 8: Ultimate Cloud OS?
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
RE: Linux servers work just fine
I have a problem with your argument
I have a point of contention with people that say that the GUI is unwelcome on a server. Quite often I'm dealing with a lot of small business customers that are using only one server box with one OS. Not only is virtualization unwarranted in those situations, but running commandline tools is a hassle, not to mention having to diagnose where a communication issue resides when you try to use remote GUI management tools. Sometimes running a full OS with GUI interface is fine for single-box configurations.
Also, updating a server is not something you want to do on a whim. Ask any Windows Server IT Pro what that's like when you have a custom or legacy .Net line-of-business app what that feels like when .Net security updates start coming down.
RE: Linux servers work just fine
RE: Linux servers work just fine
Wow, that takes me back.
Did they have a MIPS version of NT4?
I remember when certain 386 chipsets had a faulty 16-bit DMA controller. Can't remember the brand, but it wasn't Intel....
RE: Linux servers work just fine
@Joe_Raby In cases like SMBs, servers are almost always better administered with a web interface like Webmin's or Zentyal's (though I don't like the way Zentyal has destroyed the native configuration of the system). The server can sit in a closet, without monitor or mouse. It can be administered from any system on the network.
That's the exact reason why I say NO
In almost every case where a small business server needs any kind of problem, you're digging it out of a closet and having to scrounge a console for it. Not only that, but a closet is the last place I want a server because you have no easy access for an in-house person to change backup drives, no do you often have proper ventilation. When you have a system that has all of your data centralized, you don't want to stress it out simply by doing something stupid, like locking it in a small space with no air flow.
Web consoles are fine for one-a-month administration tasks (if everything is running well, you shouldn't be logging in much more frequently than that - server logs will tell you the rest, and they can be emailed to you), but I always want a local console for "when something wrong happens" because that usually involves an on-site call. I don't rely on in-house network console I/F because when users see you do that from one of their machines, they automatically get the idea of entitlement in their head and think they can administer the network too.
When I do a server setup, it goes in a ventilated room or space with a console. Physical access is still limited, depending on the office space layout, but backup "admins" (read: tape changers) are still allowed in.
Every rackmount server deployment (I don't do many because I cater mostly to businesses of less than 100 users) I do also include a mandatory console of some type. Sometimes I use an IP KVM for multi-unit rack setups because it gives me remote access even if the software remote connection is down or the system isn't booting. Although a 1-port IP KVM isn't hugely expensive, for small business customers it's a frivolous charge IMO. The system shouldn't be so complicated that it would be warranted.
BTW: SSH ports should ALWAYS be closed to the public. On 3 separate sites (all different ISP's and WAN IP's too) where I did pre-installation security penetration tests, I enabled the SSH port and within 2 minutes I had about 100 login attempts from IP's from all over the world (every 10-20 were from the same IP) with random real first names, common admin/root names, and generic weak passwords. It kept going until I closed the port.
So word of advice: don't support SSH over the internet, okay? All of my IP KVM's have it turned off even though it's somehow supposed to be more secure. It obviously isn't. Should these hackers attempt to use an alphanum brute force attack, they could easily get in.
Joe_raby, your position goes against the practice of unix admin
What unix problem has required you to get out a console? What problem last required an onsite fix? Only hardware failures require an onsite visit, even single disk failures can be rectified remotely with a RAID spare.
Small business is a perfect market for outsourced unix servers. But they need to be handled by someone that knows what they're doing.
RE: Linux servers work just fine
I have to agree
RE: Linux servers work just fine
RE: Linux servers work just fine
Don't be mad at SJVN. He just finally got to read the "Computers for Dummies" book, and he wanted to share with us what he just learned. I'm pretty sure if he keeps reading in one or two years he'll also get a slight grasp on even more elementary things in IT, he currently has absolutely not even a dim clue of.
RE: Linux servers work just fine
Dude, even for trolling, this is lame. I mean, tremendously lame. Like, a 12 year old with a complete lack of imagination would muster up something funnier.
l2notsuck.com
@lcafiero
I would have to agree. It is very likely that it's an admin hiccup. I've used about 18 different distros, for all sides of the spectrum (and no pansy stuff either... Enterprise level solutions, GFS, CLVMD, Traffic squeezer, special WASTE implementation) and I've yet to have the issues that the dude was describing.
RE: Linux servers work just fine
RE: Linux servers work just fine
Linux works fine for everyone except Loverock Davidson and you
RE: Linux servers work just fine
One additional note: who puts a GUI on a Linux server?!
RE: Linux servers work just fine
It's nice to read from someone who's experience doesn't end with clicking 'Next' through an install wizard.
RE: Linux servers work just fine
After reading Davids article, I am still not sure what he was running. Was it Ubuntu, CentOS or Fedora?
RE: Linux servers work just fine
Wow, that's such a 1980 philosophy. Good thing you don't run my servers.
RE: Linux servers work just fine