I am going to buy my own server and colocate this at a data center. This server is going to only host one website with Mysql as backend database. I notice there are 3 different Windows 2003 server, Web, Standard and Enterprise. I am leaning toward the Standard version. Can I use Window 2003 Standard Edition to run my the web server?
I see most of the providers offering Windows 2003 STD license $20-$30 per month. I wonder how is that done, do they buy licenses in bulk and then lease them monthly basis or there is an agreement with Microsoft. I have a few linux boxes colocated and would like to procure Windows licenses on my own. Also how to go for licenses for VPS server?
Im trying to setup FTP on Windows 2003 Standard. Multiple people will need access, the problem Im having is how do I make it to where certain ftp accounts only have access to certain folders and certain ftp accounts have access to the whole root directory of that folder?
For instance under websitefolder you have a folder called bobsfolder. I want bob to login and just be "jailed" to bobsfolder, but when websitefolderadmin logs in they have access to the root of websitefolder and all its subfolders.
Posted this as an add-on to another question I had in the Tech forum, had no reply, perhaps I posted in the wrong forum. Posting here instead:
I noticed MS has lifted some of the restriction concerning the Web Server edition, it's like half the price of Standard.
I'm mainly going to be hosting a couple of separate web sites, run ASP.Net and PHP, along with some database servers (currently considering SQL Server Express and MySQL).
Email server is being considered, though our load isn't too great, it's just for a couple of friends and myself. We're also intending to run game servers off it (Counter-Strike Source, Call of Duty series, etc.) on occasions.
Would the Web Server edition suffice for these? Or is it still technically limited/has license restrictions, and I will need at least the standard edition?
I may also intend to serve streaming windows Media files.
I use Windows Plesk v 11.5.30 with Mailenable Standard Edition 7.0 version. In mailenable site i saw a new version of Mailenable standard version (7.5.1). URL...Can i download and update Mailenable version of my Windows PLesk? If i made this change and have problem can i do downgrande later?
what are the standard modules which you normally need to get installed in your server or which you install ? from which you sell hosting to your customer or Which standard modules Is Most Important To Be Installed In Your Dedicated server ?
I currently run a couple of forum-heavy websites on a Pentium D950 (3.4 GHz 800FSB Dual Core 2x2mb cache). The sites use most resources for mysql and php (via apache), plus some more for email and serving images via tux.
So now I'm looking for an upgrade. I've grabbed the following off the Softlayer website:
Server CPU Speed CPU MHz CPU Cache Price Intel Xeon 5050 2 x 3.00GHz 667MHz 2 x 2MB - HT $179 Intel Xeon 5130 2 x 2.00GHz 1333MHz 1 x 4MB $199 Intel Xeon 5140 2 x 2.33GHz 1333MHz 1 x 4MB $239 Intel Xeon 5160 2 x 3.00GHz 1333MHz 1 x 4MB $279 Intel Xeon 5310 4 x 1.60GHz 1066MHz 1 x 8MB $219 Intel Xeon 5320 4 x 1.86GHz 1066MHz 1 x 8MB $259
Now what do I make of this? First of all, I'm having a hard time relating the CPU speed to the clock speed. The 5050 seems alright to me, but I've read somewhere that Dempseys are already regarded as outdated, so obviously I'm underestimating the importance of clock speed? (Do I get the performance by basically multiplying the clock speed with the CPU speed?) Also, what's up with the quad core? Is that something worth considering for the purpose mentioned above, or will it be wasted on the four cores? What about the lower CPU speed of the quad core - will the faster dual core actually get the same or even more work done?
Or am I looking at the wrong brides and should rather run and get myself two cheapo servers with php on one and mysql on the other? (Or go with one of the above and just take two disks?)
I have set up a file/print server using samba on my home network that just uses a simple 4 port linksys router, so I'm relatively familiar with routers.
Its my understanding that a hub, is kind of like a router but w/o a "to modem" spot. So you would use a hub if you just wanted to connect some computers to have a LAN party or something, right? Where there'd be no internet connection. Is this correct?
As far as switches, I get the feeling they are like routers, only better? Because data centers and companies mostly use switches, not routers? Or am I way off? What exactly is different between a switch and a router.
As a supplamental question- I will be starting college next fall, and a friend of mine said that dorm students are not supposed to use routers, but rather switches. Any idea why this would be the case?
And also, along the lines of college networks. Say I wanted to take my server with me to my dorm, how would that work? I know this depends on the university, but how would such a large network like that work- would each dorm have its own public IP address? Or would the dorm have one public IP, then each room have an internal IP? Sorry if this is a dumb question, I've really only worked with simple home networking
I got new server for free image hosting services, I was reading up about lite speed and it seems faster for this type of need however i do not have money to buy enterprise edition now, standard edition which is free but it says only 150 concurrent connection, means i can't have more than 150 ppl viewing a image? please advice or do stick with our great Apache which free