linux server cluster for old pc ?
 

I would like to know what is the best choice to make an internet type server, (like xamp, lamp linux, apache, msql, php, etc...) on old pc.
When I mean old I mean there is 4 category:
- 486 with from 128/to 256 memory. I think I can forget about this one, you'll tell me.
- pentium/amd 100 to 300 with 128/2 Gig. Too old too ?
- 350 800 with 256/2 Gig. Too old?
- 900 2,4 Mhz with 256/2Gig. Might be ok ?
It seems that it's a HA Cluster High Availability Cluster) that is needed in this case.
I make some research, but it's a complex subject, for me at least, and there is so many solutions, I need a knowledgable help.

What is the nature of the network connection through which you will serve data? If this is a home DSL connection, the bandwidth there will be the choke-point, and anything in the Pentium class of CPU should keep up okay. Shoving bytes from disk to network interfaces is a relatively low CPU load. I have run a file server/web server/firewall on a 300Mhz K6, and was able to continuously saturate the network connection. If your server is going to do much backend database work (you mentioned mysql, but no reference to how it would be used), more CPU and memory will probably be required.
--- rod.

Hi Rod,
You're right it's cable home connection 30mbits. I plan to get more speed (paying for it) when it'll become necessary.
I could use mysql for lots of things, I plan to offer services like forums, buy and sell ads, may be auctions site too, or use the database for subscribers, (paying and free, depending on offers).
Obviously there will be more than one database.
Many scripts use databases, not to say all of them.
I don't know, yet, which offers will start first.
It'll be restrained by the initial brandwith (30mbits) and hardware at hand ((around 10 old pc from i486 to P2.4 ghz).
It's difficult to say as it also depends on successes (or lack of) offers will meets.
Some may last a short time and be quickly replaced with others (it'll be more like tests) until one works and stay.
Even as low as P50 or 70, 90, 100?

Searching a little more, I found ultra monkey (using debian or red hat (it seems that debian is more developped) for High availability clustering.
But nothing yet, except your answer Rod, concerning brandwith and old pc.


Thank you for your help, it is much appreciated.

Without any significant database &/or CGI backend stuff, your P100 will be fine as a file/web server on a DSL connection. I ran a phpBB based forum for a short time on the above mentioned K6-based host (actually, it was a 200Mhz, not 300MHz as I said earlier), and with few users (I think there were never more than 4 concurrent), it was okay. Just for the sake of my own interest, I recently set up Plone on a 350 Mhz, 256MB K6/2, and this was hopelessly slow. Plone, based on Zope, generates all pages from Python code, based on its own internal database. I will probably use this as a rough benchmark of server speed for future evaluations.

I have used a 32MB 66Mhz 486 machine as a simple firewall for a home network. This was running the single floppy based Coyote Linux. Network speeds were slower in those days, but even that old dog could keep up with the network.

In summary, I think it is best to look at the non-networking aspects of a file/web server to evaluate performance. If there is little else besides serving static pages & files, a relatively pedestrian system will do.

I cannot speak to the matter of High Availability, per se, but again, the reliability issues in my world have more to do with my ISP and power provider than the equipment I run.

--- rod.

It's funny, because we did same kind of experiments, I think for same reasons : fun, learning, curiosity! I did it with an amd300 256Mo memory lamp and a database forum with around 5/6 people conecting, result a bit slow and some crash! I had to stop it.

Yes, in a word : test, test, test.

Right, understood, first the basics : network itself and electric power.
It reminds me that there is two values in network flow the downstream in this case a theorical 30 Mb AND the upstream which is desperatly slower 512 Kb - theorical. So, speed comes down to this theorical upload value.
Which put me back to the first one : test, test, test.

This is really good, down to earth, advices.
They are so clear when put on paper that I wonder why I hadn't them myself.
And that's precisely how you know they are good advices.

Many thanks.