Talk:Server (computing)/Archive 1

Audio Broadcasting Servers
Is their a current discussion about audio broadcasting servers. I think it should be added Term usage in information technology. So far I only know they don't use TCP / UDP OSI layer 4,  they use their own packets system. So I bet the adminastration and implementation wouldn't follow CCNA for sure. Not exactly sure are same classified similarily as Streaming Media Servers, like YouTube.

--Ramu50 (talk) 23:19, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Server line of descent
For a discussion of server computing (HW & OS)'s descent from mini vs microcomputers, see Talk:Minicomputer. --Wernher 02:25, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

History
If someone knows the history of servers in computing, that would be useful information to add to the article. --Putlake 02:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Readability
The article may be more readable if it is clearly broken up into sections for hardware, OS, application, and X. Right now, people who aren't experienced techies would probably have trouble understanding it. I could probably handle most of this myself, but I am not familiar enough with X Windows to move or change any of it. May make changes later anyway if no one else does though. Endless

Sample code
I removed the following sample code because it seemed a bit extraneous for the article. cprompt

Example of Very Simple Java Server

This Java program basically waits for a connection on port 21; when it gets a connection from an FTP or from a telnet client the server does its thing.

import java.io.*; import java.net.*;

public class YorickServer {   private static PrintWriter out;

public static void main(String[] args) {       try {           ServerSocket serverSocket = new ServerSocket(21);

Socket incomingClient = serverSocket.accept; BufferedReader in = new BufferedReader(new InputStreamReader(incomingClient.getInputStream)); out = new PrintWriter(incomingClient.getOutputStream, true);

out.println("Welcome to the Hello Translation!"); out.println("QUIT to exit the translator");

while (processCommand(in.readLine)); incomingClient.close;

}       catch (Exception e)        { e.printStackTrace; }   }

private static boolean processCommand(String command) {       if (command.equals("QUIT")) {           out.println("Bye!"); return false; }       else if (command.equals("ENG")) {           out.println("Hello"); }       else if (command.equals("FRE")) {           out.println("Bonjour"); }       else if (command.equals("SPA")) {           out.println("Hola"); }       else {           out.println("Error. Language not supported."); }

return true; } }

Server log is both an orphan and deadend page. Christopherlin 02:48, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

X-Internet
Does anyone know what the X-Internet link refers to? No other page has a similar link and a google search only pulls up wikipedia or sites that mirror wikipedia content. AlistairMcMillan 21:07, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Readibility x 2
The lead section needs improving quite a bit. Any suggestions? - Ta bu shi da yu 03:51, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Multi-threding
Is multi-threading in the OS really needed for servers?

Definition of Server
There are many software and other things that "... carries out some task ...". The thing that makes it to a server is that a server waits until one or more client sends a query to him. The server is the active and the client is the passive part of this form of communication. There are other forms of communications between software, ex peer-to-peer. The short Example of Very Simple Java Server above is a good example of a server.
 * Okay, say what you just said in understandable, grammatical, correct English language, and I won't revert it again. --Schapel 05:09, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Server hardware
The "Server hardware" section currently says that "The X-Internet, Web Services, and Microsoft's .NET initiative all work to make even the smallest system a server." This sentence doesn't really make sense to me, though. It's not as if any of these initiatives do anything to make it easier for small systems to be servers. In fact, it could be argued that they make it harder, since they already require an IP stack, which is enough for a device to act as a server, and then add to that complexity.

Could someone please explain to me what this sentence really means and why it makes sense? Otherwise, I will delete it. --Dolda2000 20:44, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Changes
I've taken the liberty of overhauling this article to some extent, with several objectives in mind:
 * More generic orientation (not everyone viewing the article will be a computer specialist)
 * Less time-sensitive information (today's leading application might not be tomorrow's)
 * Less mention of brand names
 * Reorganized information and divided into sections
 * Removed X server stuff, which belongs in its own article; mentioning it here may be confusing to non-specialist readers
 * Removed mention of things like .NET architecture and other highly specific and proprietary stuff
 * Treated "server" as a reference to complete systems throughout, to avoid confusing non-specialists (usage notes in previous version were a bit bewildering to anyone not already familiar with the topic)
 * Removed some discussion of specific protocols, again to avoid being too technical
 * Removed section reference to mainframes; mainframes are alive and well, and servers did not replace them
 * Removed slight bias towards certain technologies; a lot of people know only PCs or only Intel, etc., and a bit more balance seemed appropriate

Agateller 18:36, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Only UNIX?
It should be noted that, while most servers that provide services like web servers, ftp servers, etc. run UNIX based systems, almost all efficient user and access administration servers for windows environments run Windows server OS themselves. Some of the sections seem to imply that unix systems are the "best" server operating systems.
 * I don't know that "almost all" is true. I administer a couple of Debian Linux servers that do nothing but provide services (file, printing, database, mail, proxy, fax, etc.) to local Windows networks; they seem to me to be simpler, more efficient, much more flexible, and far more economical, than the Windows servers they replaced. Rwxrwxrwx 11:08, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know how much "couple of Debian servers" is, but there are major installations of purely Windows Server enviroments. I personally know of 100+ servers installation administered by as much as 2-4 people. According to last Microsoft financial report they sell a lot of server OSes, so there should really be a lot of Windows Server installations in the world. Current version of article seems biased in "real admins run *nix, MS go home" way to me. Alexander Abramov 02:23, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know about that. Windows fileservers for local networks just seem so terribly inefficient and cumbersome. All I've ever used for that purpose has been Linux. --139.168.220.11 (talk) 10:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * The question was if there is practicaly only *nix operating systems in use on servers, not if some random administrators above thinks Microsoft OS is bad. In my experience it is very common to use Windows server OS on servers. If they are better than Unix or the other way around is not the question here. 213.66.124.103 (talk) 21:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Small x86 servers (1, 2, 4 or 8 processors) generally run Windows. Big servers (16, 32, 64, 128+ processors) from vendors like IBM or Sun generally run UNIX. Linux runs on all of them. Does putting it this way help? The statement in question should be clarified. Rilak (talk) 06:53, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Google
There is groundbreaking work on servers performed at Google (as I hear), and I feel it should be reflected in this page. Todd 22:38, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

redirect from host (computing)
seems wrong. the term "host" in computing/telcom typically means "any computer connected to a network" i.e. "host system" dns "host names" etc. I dont think the redirect should go here. Comments?--Boscobiscotti 06:59, 16 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm most eager to find out about this. I suspect that hosts actually host something, perhaps information. I wonder whether "any computer connected to a network" is actually synonymous with "node." I suspect it isn't. But I agree about the redirect. It's disconcerting, when seeking information about what hosts are, what they do, whether they all have something in common, and so on, to find an article entitled "Server (computing)" cropping up instead. Unfree (talk) 04:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Servers and the law
Reading the statement 'not against the law in the US state of Florida where Wikipedia's servers are hosted' (See WP:CENSORED), I'm interested in the legal aspects of servers. What if one were to create an artificial island in international waters and keep one's servers there? Perhaps the article should mention the legal aspects regarding servers. Richard001 03:05, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
 * While I'm not a lawyer, I presume that servers are subject to the laws of the country in which they are located. If one were to put servers on an island in international waters, unclaimed by any country, then I suppose no laws would govern the servers at all. HavenCo was a data haven located in the microstate of Sealand, but it doesn't seem to be active according to the article.  C omrade   T  ux  06:33, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Home Networks vs. Wireless Security
This is why securing home networks has become important of late.[2] I suggest that we change it to "This is why securing wireless home networks has become important of late.[2]" This is because it its linking to wireless, but the link reads just "securing home networks", which is a little bit looser? any other ideas? Admiralthrawn999 06:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree. Changed. --139.168.220.11 (talk) 10:36, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, forgot to log in. --Aseld (talk) 10:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)