up vote 1 down vote favorite
share [g+] share [fb]

I want to migrate a small server which runs several perl and mono applications under Linux to Windows 7 non-server version. All applications use TCP and are triggered via the crontab. From my understanding the TCP limit is not in Windows 7 anymore and the limit affects only the frequency in which TCP connections are created. Are there any other restrictions which can be a problem if I move to a non-Windows server version_

link|improve this question
62% accept rate
What advantage would hosting your applications on Windows 7 give you over your current platform ? – Dave Cheney Feb 23 '10 at 8:57
Well. if its an app that dosen't have very heavy usage you could always run it in a VM (which you might want to consider, while beating things into shape. I suppose you'd have to swap crontab for task scheduler (which.. isn't entirely a bad thing in some ways). It does seem a little backwards to switch from a perfectly good server OS to a desktop one (I'd want to check the licence if it is a production system, to see if windows 7 allows it), unless you needed the hardware to be a windows workstation, and you had none to spare. – Journeyman Geek Feb 23 '10 at 9:04
The reason is the Mono part which runs slower than native .NET. – weismat Feb 23 '10 at 9:12
1  
@weismat: why the switch to a desktop OS instead of Windows Server? (If you are going to consider the switch at all...) – MattB Feb 23 '10 at 17:25
desktop OS reason are costs. and The apps are IO and CPU intensive. – weismat Feb 26 '10 at 13:20
show 2 more comments
feedback

1 Answer

up vote -4 down vote

Moving to Windows 7 will result in a number of issues:

  • Licensing Remote Desktop Access (most Windows versions limit you to 2 simultaneous connections)
  • extremely poor network file sharing quality, regular network drop outs, dropped shares, and more
  • extremely poor quality TCP network stack - connections take much longer to establish
  • extremely poor process start-up time compared to Linux
  • more problems for which there are no answers, especially given that the little things you expect to just "be there" are often restricted due to licencing issues with Microsoft

Until you've actually experienced the horror of believing in a Microsoft Operating System or Enterprise product there's little reason for you to believe me. So you can come back and re-read this post in 6 months time as a "told you so".

link|improve this answer
I can live with the first two things as we are a small office anyway. regarding the network stack I believe that Windows has improved a lot since NT (as it was totally rewritten). The process startup time is bad in Perl/Mono also. – weismat Feb 23 '10 at 12:33
Believe what you want to believe. Hell always looks more appealing than Heaven. – PP. Feb 23 '10 at 14:01
1  
Problem is that very very little of the above is actually grounded in reality and is really really slipping into the "subjective and argumentative" zone. – mh. Feb 23 '10 at 16:26
feedback

Your Answer

 
or
required, but never shown
discard

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.