LinuxQuestions.org
Go Job Hunting at the LQ Job Marketplace
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Server
User Name
Password
Linux - Server This forum is for the discussion of Linux Software used in a server related context.

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 02-17-2011, 11:52 PM   #1
pocketazes
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Posts: 4

Rep: Reputation: 0
Need recommendation for Proliant DL580 G3 with quad Xeon, 16 GB RAM


I originally posted this thread on the Linux - Newbie forum but I think this may be the most suited forum for this question.

Hi experts,

I'm very new to Linux and I'm looking for some guidance on which version of Linux server I should install. I read several posts that try to compare Slackware, Debian server, and Ubuntu but the message I got is that each version has its pros/cons. The version that you end up using should ultimately be the best for what you are trying to do. I'll try to explain what I'm trying to do to see if it helps in making a recommendation.

I purchased a HP Proliant DL580 G3 with the following configuration:

(4) Intel Xeon 3.0Ghz CPU's W/ 8mb Cache/667mHz FSB
16GB RAM @ 16 x 1GB ELPIDA PC2-3200-333
(2) 36.4GB 15k U320 SCSI Hard Drives
(2) Power Supplies
DVD Drive

This server will be configured as my web server and database server. I will use Apache and MySQL.

I want the server to be as secure as possible and will be following the recommendations on the book "Hacking Linux Exposed" to configure Linux.

I would like to install a version of Linux that will utilize all of the server's resources - the 4 x Xeon Processors and the 16 GB of RAM. As for the RAID configuration I plan to just have the hard drives mirrored. And lastly someone recommended that I cache my website in the RAM for faster load times. I have not researched this yet but would like the Linux version suggested to allow me to do this. I assume any Linux version would allow me to do this but I thought it would be safer to include it in this list.

Thank you in advance for your guidance.
 
Old 02-18-2011, 05:14 AM   #2
salasi
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Location: Directly above centre of the earth, UK
Distribution: SuSE, plus some hopping
Posts: 3,919

Rep: Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779
Quote:
Originally Posted by pocketazes View Post
I originally posted this thread on the Linux - Newbie forum but I think this may be the most suited forum for this question.
The correct procedure in this circumstance is to report your own thread and ask a mod to move it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pocketazes View Post
...but the message I got is that each version has its pros/cons.
That is what you'd expect, isn't it? I mean, a version that only had cons wouldn't get used much, leaving only the versions with some pros in existence and being actively developed.

Quote:
(4) Intel Xeon 3.0Ghz CPU's W/ 8mb Cache/667mHz FSB
16GB RAM @ 16 x 1GB ELPIDA PC2-3200-333
(2) 36.4GB 15k U320 SCSI Hard Drives
(2) Power Supplies
DVD Drive
Nice, but it doesn't do anything to help prefer one candidate distro over any other.

Quote:
This server will be configured as my web server and database server. I will use Apache and MySQL.
Again, any candidate OS will have Apache and Mysql available.

Quote:
I want the server to be as secure as possible and will be following the recommendations on the book "Hacking Linux Exposed" to configure Linux.
Good that you want it to be secure, but that is more about you taking appropriate precautions and having appropriate procedures, rather than what comes 'out of the box'.

Quote:
I would like to install a version of Linux that will utilize all of the server's resources - the 4 x Xeon Processors and the 16 GB of RAM.
You'll want 64 bit; Apache is (incomprehensibly, to me, at least) significantly faster on 64 bit, and it gives better support of that ram. But then, everything that is a server OS comes in 64 bit, so that doesn't help in separating server OSs.

Quote:
And lastly someone recommended that I cache my website in the RAM for faster load times.
I have suspicions about this recommendation, at least as stated.
  • If it meant something like 'use squid in httpd accelerator mode' then that might be sensible
  • The advantage from caching depends a lot on the content and how dynamic it is (however you do the caching). So, it depends a lot on the nature of the site.
  • If you were using something complex like a CMS, what you cache could be several things, and a bland statement like 'use caching' could several quite different approaches, some advantageous, some not. And that depends on various unknown things.
 
1 members found this post helpful.
Old 02-18-2011, 12:55 PM   #3
jwl17330536
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2010
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 83

Rep: Reputation: 22
I don't think anyone will be able to give you the answer that you are looking for. Everyone here has their own opionions on which OS to use. Asking us here what OS to use would be like asking which race car to buy on a racing forum.
 
Old 02-18-2011, 06:42 PM   #4
pocketazes
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Posts: 4

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Thank you for the feedback guys. I decided to go with CentOS.
 
Old 02-19-2011, 05:05 AM   #5
archtoad6
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2004
Location: Houston, TX (usa)
Distribution: MEPIS, Debian, Knoppix,
Posts: 4,727
Blog Entries: 15

Rep: Reputation: 231Reputation: 231Reputation: 231
The original discussion is here:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...580-g3-863441/

Notes:
pocketazes,

As salasi advises above, please report your own post to request a mod to move it to a more appropiate forum; we will be happy to help.


salasi,

Thank you for reporting this. We rely heavily on the vigillance of all members, esp. Senior Members, like yourself, to bring situations like this to the mods attention. In the future when you notice a cross post, please try to report the cross post, not your answer. Also, it would helpful to report the thread that needs to be closed, not the one that should stay open. Finally, while not required, it is always helpful & appreciated to include a link to other post of the pair. Just some friendly suggestions, we appreciate your efforts to make LQ the best forum on the 'Net. Thank you.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[SOLVED] Debian server vs Ubuntu server vs Slackware for Quad Xeon DL580 G3 pocketazes Linux - Newbie 4 02-19-2011 04:30 AM
Can I Add one 1GB speed LAN card to ProLiant DL580 server bobbinsupport Linux - Networking 1 06-24-2009 09:36 AM
Processor Type for Xeon Quad on Kernel 2.6.18 Coyote34 Linux - Kernel 7 12-10-2007 12:20 PM
Xeon - HyperThreading - Dual Processor becoming Quad grant-skywalker Linux - Enterprise 5 02-08-2006 07:58 AM
IBM Netfinity 7000 QUAD XEON Species8472 Linux - Hardware 0 05-12-2004 06:27 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:07 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration