core vs linux server
-
Wednesday, October 19, 2011 10:26 PM
can the Server Core be as lean and mean as Linux Server in that it eats minimal resources in favor of the hypervisor?
I am considering this approach for running several virtual servers
I used Linux for years simply as I could not afford Windows server. Worse Server was way behind the curve. Today I have nominally been able to achieve a substantial fraction of the same functionality
still learning how to get PHP working 100% but its OK with simple stuff now
I should mention that Linux server is command line only. Its not DOS compatible, its all different. I have to pause and look at the prompt for the console to make sure I use the right command set.
anyway the core lean?
Windows MVP 2010-11, XP, Vista, 7. Expanding into Windows Server 2008 R2, SQL Server, SharePoint, Cloud, Virtualization etc. etc.
Hardcore Games, Legendary is the only Way to Play
Developer | Windows IT | Chess | Economics | Vegan Advocate | PC Reviews
- Changed Type Vincent HuModerator Friday, October 21, 2011 3:26 AM
All Replies
-
Thursday, October 20, 2011 7:33 AMModerator
Hi,
Please check the following guide.
Hyper-V: The Server Core installation option is recommended for servers running Hyper-V
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee941130(WS.10).aspx
Vincent Hu
-
Thursday, October 20, 2011 12:28 PM
I am not currently using AD as I have no need, but I am interested in the architecture for clients so I can best advise deployment
Still AD has its place even with the core on pool blades
Windows MVP 2010-11, XP, Vista, 7. Expanding into Windows Server 2008 R2, SQL Server, SharePoint, Cloud, Virtualization etc. etc.
Hardcore Games, Legendary is the only Way to Play
Developer | Windows IT | Chess | Economics | Vegan Advocate | PC Reviews
.png)
