What Linux server is best for you?

No matter what size you are, there is always a distribution that is suitable.

When it comes to buying clothes, I am like ordinary people. I just want to go to a store, take off the right clothes, buy it (what, try it on? Are you kidding?!), go straight home. That's right, I just want to do this. Over the years, I have understood this: just because something should be appropriate does not mean that it will be appropriate. The same is true for Linux servers. Of course, they are built on the same code base and can run the same application, but one may be right for you, and the other may not be for you.

So, how do you know which one is right for you? Let's take a look at the basic question you should ask for any calculation decision: “What do you really want to do?” Br>

Apply to large companies

Suppose your company has hundreds to tens of thousands of users. What kind of Linux server do you want? This question is actually very easy to answer. Your first choice should be Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL).

Red Hat provides very mature and comprehensive support for large companies, and it is easy to find certified technicians, administrators and engineers who are familiar with RHEL. RHEL is also supported on a wide range of hardware. Whether you're running a rack x86 server, a blade server, an IBM POWER system, or a mainframe, there's always a RHEL for you. In short, Red Hat is a model for enterprise Linux.

Sorry, long hair, and now Red Hat is quite suitable for large enterprises.

I think the cost of RHEL is too high, not suitable for your taste? After all, one point is worth the price; but there are two other enterprise-level Linux distributions that deserve the attention of big companies. The two distributions are Oracle Linux and SUSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES).

Oracle Linux is actually a cottage version of RHEL. Although I know that some people like Oracle Linux rather than the parent release (RHEL), as far as I know, most people who have used it feel that there is no reason to recommend it, not RHEL. On the other hand, SLES has an easy-to-use installation and management tool: YaST, which I think is useful for deployment in a branch-scale environment.

Suppose you have a team of Linux experts who don't specialize in RHEL, Oracle Linux or SLES. In this case, you might want to consider Debian (http://www.debian.org/). This is a community Linux, but for those who have a deep understanding of Debian, it works great. However, Debian is not Linux for non-expert users.

Apply to small companies

Well, suppose your company has only a few hundred people, or only a few dozen people, maybe you and a dog. What kind of Linux server do you need now? All the above options still apply. However, I feel that RHEL and SLES are more difficult to win in this regard. In my experience, RHEL is easier to manage on many servers scattered across multiple locations, and SLES is always good for me in a small office. I suggest that you try both, and then make your own decision.

At present, if you already have some high-quality Linux administrators and want to save some money, then I would recommend taking a look at the respective community distributions of Red Hat and SUSE: Fedora (http://fedoraproject. Org/) and openSUSE (http://www.opensuse.org/en/). It is not possible to get support from their respective companies from both. In other words, if you choose these distributions, you have to provide your own support. But if your IT staff is familiar with Linux, you may be able to meet the requirements of a small company without assistance. For my own small office (with 20 desktops and 4 servers), openSUSE works great.

How about Ubuntu? Ubuntu is perhaps the most popular brand in desktop Linux distributions. There is also Ubuntu Linux Server. You can use Ubuntu Server for larger companies; but for large enterprise-scale workloads, I prefer to support me like big companies like Oracle, Red Hat or SUSE because they are working on data installed. Experience in systems in a central-scale environment. If it is a server with at most one or two racks, Ubuntu should work well.

Indeed, if your requirements for a small office/home office (SOHO) server are just basic file and printer sharing services, then any server Linux today will suffice. Indeed, in the smallest office, you may already be using Linux, but you are not aware of it. Many network attached storage (NAS) devices that can be used as USB print servers use Linux to provide file and print services, such as the Buffalo LinkStation Pro series (http://www.buffalotech.com/products/network-storage/) . For small offices, this may be the Linux you need.

But what if you need a Linux server between the two? You know you need more than just basic file and print services, but don't want to pay someone to be a server administrator. . You can act as a server administrator yourself, but you want to spend your time on the company's business rather than on the server. In this case, is there Linux for you?

Of course. Over the years, there have been many Linux distributions that are ready to use. If you use this distribution, you can install Linux on the server —— the server may be a very old desktop, just a bit too old, no longer able to continue to use it everyday, or buy a hardware device Use a single interface to take charge of everything. The two representatives of the current Linux server that was forgotten after the installation are ClearOS (http://www.clearfoundation.com/Software/overview.html) and Zentyal (http://www.zentyal.org/).