Slashdot Mirror
Unlimited Linux Web server Clusters
Gihadrah writes "Pacific Hi-Tech will next week preview
a new version of its Linux distribution that lets system
operators tie together as many Linux machines as they want
in order to achieve faster and more reliable Web servers.
"
...this!!!
NT already has this. Name one thing that linux has that Microsoft's NT doesn't have. Pretty soon, you're gonna have clusters of thousands of Windows NT 5 servers, and all you dorks will be fawning over *them*.
This sounds like something Slashdot could use...
free source code
the only thing slashdot could use is to remove everything to do with mod_perl. php would be a better solution.
> However, those [distribution] companies still
> are nowhere near being able to provide the level
> of worldwide support big companies will demand
> before they put essential software such as
> accounts receivable or order entry on Linux
> servers, Gartner Group analyst Tom Henkel noted.
I'm thinking that IBM, HP and Compaq will be factored into the OS and hardware support equation any year now by the Gartner Group. You would think that such a reputable bunch of analysts whose primary function is to prepare the industry for the upcoming technologies would be slightly more accurate than they are. But perhaps only Microsoft can really provide that worldwide support GG was refering to.
First, they fail to predict us. Then they fail to research us. Then they fail.
It exists. If that isn't sufficient then the how about the fact that you won't be REQUIRED to run 5-10 servers when 1 with a decent OS on it will do. Oh, and then there is the fact that Linux is easy to remotely administer. And then there is the fact that things like Samba (which implement a close m$ protocol) mean that a Linux server on a m$ network works BETTER than nt.
Hmm, you bring up a very good question what (good thing) does nt have that Linux doesn't?
From what I heard NT's "clustering" is just a failover system. It doesn't distribute the work among the nodes like Beowulf does, so you could never make something like Avalon with NT. Am I wrong on this one?
ummm I could almost swear that Linux don't have no smeeeelly trolls on NT boards
there are lots of ways of achieving similar results with standalone servers running apache using enough scripting and apache configuration. however, its nice to see a commercial application for those who don't want to bother with it.
While plenty of other people have had this idea before, it's interesting to note that even the Newspaper Association of America ran an article on the same thing at http://www.digitaledge.org/m onthly/1998_10/heschong.html
Check that website again soon.
Considering how often NT crashes, I don't see how you could possible run a server on NT without a fault tolerant clustering scheme....
Maybe now, people will be able to set up websites capable of standing up to the /. effect, eh?
That's a good point, it will take a cluster of thousands of NT servers so match the power of a linux box. In fact, it will probably be a requirement if you want the type of stability linux can offer you. How much that cluster of a thousand NT servers gonna cost ya?
OK, all you people out there crying because this isn't Open Source, get a grip. It's commercial software serving a somewhat specialized market. The people that wrote it have the right to make money off it, that is there choice, and there is nothing wrong with it.
Don't like that? Fine, go out and do an Open Source implementation that works better.
Sure Open Source is great, and Linux is doing amazingly well, but Linux needs Commercial Software to find true mainstream acceptance.
....but penguins will be hanging out on that page soon.
Ericsson, creators of the Erlang functional programming language, ATM switches and so forth, released Eddie as Open Source some time ago. It seems to do much more than some of the programs suggested here.
"..big companies want support..before they put essential software such as accounts receivable or order entry on
Linux servers, Gartner Group analyst Tom Henkel noted."
Like, who cares how the Gartner Group feels? Since when have they ever done anything themselves? Like, the current employees can't dope out Linux?
Linux is to Windows as SQL is to SOL.
Erlang is open source. The functional programming community generally agrees that it is an excellent language for this sort of thing. Not all of the world is C.
Then how does Beowulf work?
FREEDOM!!!
I suggest looking at the comp.lang.functional FAQ. The newsgroup has reasonable traffic even though content varies between beginner and theoretician levels.
: NT already has this. Name one thing that linux has that Microsoft's NT doesn't have.
Stability?
: Pretty soon, you're gonna have clusters of thousands of Windows NT 5 servers, and all you dorks will be fawning over *them*.
More like laughing my ass off, because due to the instability and inefficiency of NT those clusters are _NEEDED_ in a bunch of instances.
Posted by BobSkiAS778:
Linux has two thing NT will probably never have, a zero monetary price (although all software has costs), and open source. As for user features, you may be right, except I'd consider performance and portability two user features in which Linux beats NT.
I'll probably regret replying to this, as it's obviously flame bait ("you dorks"). Come on, give me a break. No one with an intelligent argument has to resort to personal attacks (bonus points if you spot the hypocricy in that statement!)
Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:
I'll name one thing that linux has that NT doesnt. STABILITY! There are still linux machines running the original kernel without a reboot in several years.
Just too bad the NT robs a processor of a significant portion of it's power. I guarantee you that with two identical clusters of machines, one running linux and one running NT, the linux cluster will be faster.
LK
Linux has stability, scability and robustness, just to name a few. NT is barely able to hold its own as a single-user desktop machine. In addition, Linux can out-class NT on multiple platforms - go run NT on an UltraSPARC. You are so funny. Also, manage an NT server remotely - go on, try it. Hahahahahahahahahahahaha. What a maroon. Oh, nt5, or win2k, or whatever the name-dujour is, is vapour. More methane from Redmond. But, as we all know, folks like you make statements like yours because of prolonged exposure to the gasious eminations from ms.
"shop smart:shop s-mart" ash
Couldn't a Beowulf cluster ideally be set up to serve as a sort of "server farm" with round-robin DNS and failovers? This would be a great app I would think, no?
Jeez. I'd rather roll my own at that cost. Sounds like they may have actually done just that... ;>
Now troll, don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya. And take NT with you when you leave. :)
Are there any good resources out there that anyone knows about to setup such a "server farm" under Linux?
Name one thing that linux has that Microsoft's NT doesn't have.
AFAIK, NT can only do IP masquerading by replacing parts of the client machines's TCP/IP stack with their proprietary MS Proxy stuff, so it only works with Windows clients. Linux's IP masquerading requires no modifications to the clients' IP stacks, so you can use anything as a client. I'm pretty sure the Linux IP masquerading implementation was out first, too.
"My life's work has been to prompt others... and be forgotten." --Cyrano de Bergerac
Sell for 1000? Sounds like proprietary extensions... So what's the story; is it running apache or not?
Can a custom-built config (config only) be copyrighted? i.e. can you sell a config of an open-source system? I wonder.
--
The real Paul Vallee is slashdot userid 2192, and, what do you mean it's not cool to point out your low userid?
Give me a break, the on top of it plug is obviously my .sig, and my post is on-topic.
--
The real Paul Vallee is slashdot userid 2192, and, what do you mean it's not cool to point out your low userid?
Is this the same PHT whose FTP site I couldn't
:)
bring up for over a week?
This is the massive scalability I have been waiting for
Run to your master, run, pitiful beast of darkness. Go tell him the light of Elbereth shines again and will wash away the filthy and the desolation he inflicted upon us for an age to end.
We could build a kewl Beowulf clu...doh. Nevermind. ;-)
This sig is false.
I work for an Hosting farm and we use Solaris, Linux, and NT. Let me tell you, you need thousands of NT servers clustered together to get the same stabilty you would get from one Linux box. I have cycle all of our NT boxes at least once a day. The only time I ever reboot the linux boxes is for kernel/hardware upgrades.
Plus, these guys have a free download for this (stripped down, but still useful) that runs on FreeBSD.
-- ultra1
>Name one thing that linux has that Microsoft's NT >doesn't have.
Stability.
But NT does have more pretty blue screens!
so, let's suppose you learn that slashdot is going to mention your server. what you do then is the following procedure:
1) beg-borrow-steal every spare computer you can lay your hands on.
2) install aux-server stuff on each
3) config them to backfill for your main server
4) weather the slashdot hurricane
5) return everybody's computers with a smile.
obviously, servers see a bursty duty cycle, so why not let the sysop do a quick reshuffling of hardware.
As always you can see illiterati, who didn't try to understand the contents of that $ 29,95 CD-Rom of RedHat with Extreme Linux, Beowulf and so on. Or does he mean that NT is sold for that 30 bucks or less in order to be installed on a cluster of 520 systems as in Germany by CLOWN - CLuster Of Working Nodes (see http://www.heise.de/ix/artikel/1999/01/010/).
Fortuna favet fatuis (Fortuna favors fools, and most of them run windows)
http://proxy.iinchina.net/~wensong/ippfvs is a free implementation of the same idea for Linux. None of this $1000 per server crap.
I use it on a 6 node cluster at home... works great. (does nice load balancing too) There's also an entry at freshmeat for it.
-
BlackNova Traders