Windows Updates

[madhouse]

This may be a stupid question but I thought I'd ask anyway.

Some of you may have seen my other post re suggestions for firewall software. This new question is regarding Windows Updates for the dedicated Windows 2000 server that I've taken ownership of.

I realise how important it is to keep the system up to date with the latest patches and service packs from Microsoft, so I have set-up the Windows Updates to download automatically and to just let me know when they need to be installed. However, some of the updates require the system to be re-booted. Now if I'm hosting numerous websites on the server, I'm correct in saying that by rebooting the server this is going to bring down the websites?? If so, what other impacts, if any, will it have when the server is re-booted - in other words is it safe? Told you it was a stupid question!!

Also, by bringing the server down, will any services such as FTP, MSSQL Server etc need to be restarted?

 

[JamesonJ]

Reboots always suck when it comes to a server. It sounds like the websites will be unavailable during the reboot, but should be available afterwords. Check MS site. There is a way to install several Updates before a required reboot is necessary. If this server is a Global Catalog Server, you will also lose authentication ability. Also, if this server is a file and print server, printing and shared directories will be unavailable.

Hope this helps,
JamesonJ

 

[bluewhaleCA]

Microsoft is FAMOUS for puting out patches that break other parts of their own software, not to mention 3rd party software.
If you are being paid to keep the server up all the time ( IE they can sue you ) and you insist on running W2K ( I run it too, just don't rely on it for a web server ) I would suggest installing only patches you need.
We just signed up for a patch service from St Bernard software... they review the patches and help keep all systems on the network properly patched: I'm not certain how as I have had the software for a couple of days and have not found time to look at it yet, however it and a few others repeatedly get good reviews in Infoworld, EWeek, PC MAgazine, etc.


Paul

 

[madhouse]

bluewhaleCA - when you say "don't rely on it for a web server", what do you mean by this? Are you basically saying that Windows 2000 is no good for hosting web sites?

 

[Redfox1]

Depending on the types of services you are running on the server if you reboot them then yes, they will be unavailable until the server is back up.

Check the Services MMC snap-in or right click on My Computer and select "Manage"

Look at the services that are "Running" and ask yourself how important it is... and whether other users/systems might be using it...

If this server is a Domain Controller for Active Directory, you might be disrupting other computers or services on other computers (like the previous reply has indicated.)
If it is just a member server then you will more than likely affect only the hosted websites.
Do you have any shares on that server that others connect to etc?

Redfox1

 

[bluewhaleCA]

Madhouse:

I do not host a public web site, thus can relate only what I read. Microsoft's IIS is so poorly secured that the Garner Group suggested last year that all businesses not use it for a public web hosting platform. I believe that is part of the ' secure ' mentality Microsoft says it has adopted.
I am hoping to find time one day to bring our tiny web hosting inside:if I do it will be on Linux/Apache, not Microsoft.
I would suggest posting in this forum

http://www.tek-tips.com/threadforum.cfm?lev2=3&lev3=22

They seem to have a forum for all of the popular Web Hosting solutions... you're sure to get different answers from each camp, but comparing them might let you make a more informed decision.


Regards

Paul

 

[GiaBetiu]

Want reliability from a server? Want low downtime?
The book is saing: clustering!
That is network load balancing or whatever software for clustering, that is the only one that will reduce the absolutelly normal down time for a server.
Are you doing maintenance of your server? How?

As about OSes which one is more reliable, or best suitable,.. no comments. We are speaking about principles.


Gia Betiu
gia@almondeyes.net
Computer Eng. CNE 4, CNE 5, MCSE Win2K
new:

http://www.almondeyes.net

(just started)

 

[bluewhaleCA]

Yes, but most of we the littel people can't afford clustering.

I was comparing apples to apples. But can't one cluster Linux or UNIX boxes? Why fall back to Clustering just to obtain reliability?

The same held true 10 years ago: banks and hospitals chose OS2 over NT because OS2 rarely crashed. Microsoft crashed or had to be rebooted constantly. Sadly, IBM could not define the word 'marketing'.


Paul