[NCLUG] Windows Server 2003 to Linux migration

Bob Proulx bob at proulx.com
Wed Jul 20 16:54:15 MDT 2016


Hi Frank,

Zak Smith wrote:
> F.L. Whiteley wrote:
> > You are correct the asp(x) website is a problem, but the
> > migrations to W2012 R2 is no picnic either.  ...
> > If we are looking at that sort of expense and effort, perhaps a
> > linux port might be preferable and remove ourselves from the
> > vendor track.  There are some reasons for a rebuild from the
> > ground up.

At first glance I agree that converting to a LAMP-like stack is
attractive.  Afterward you would have a much more robust and portable
infrastructure.  Knowing nothing about your specific situation I would
cast a vote that direction.

But the real question is how many pages and/or functions do your web
sites provide?  What is the complexity of it?  Do you have 20 pages or
200 pages or 2000 pages?  If it were my site and it were 20 pages I
would definitely convert it.  If it is 2000 then I would probably be
more preserving.

There is an old adage that if you are going down the wrong road then
the longer you keep going the longer it will be before you get on the
right road.  Turn around and go back as soon as possible.  So you
might as well make a decision about the right road and try to get on
it.  Of couse this is the NCLUG list so most of us will be of the same
mind about which road is the right one. :-) Ask on a Microsoft list
and the concensus would be the opposite.  But certainly if it were me
in your position I would be looking at what it takes to convert to
something supportable.

> > That said there are over 20 years archival data in
> > some of the database instances.

> My own take is that a lot depends on the complexity of the application
> layer that was encoded in those ASP/ASPX files, as opposed to the
> complexity of the data itself

Agreed.  Years of data is in the database is no problem.  That's
great.  Twenty years or one month is all the same.  A new web
interface accessing the same data and it is all working on the new
system.  I wouldn't be put off by having a lot of data in the
database.  Migrating from MS SQL Server to anything else is pretty
much the same effort regardless of size.  In which case big is fine
since it is cheaper per byte then.

> There are some modules for nginx/apache that may be able to run
> ASP.NET pages natively.  Here's one I found in 2 seconds,
> http://www.mono-project.com/docs/web/aspnet/

Very interesting...

Here is another possibility.  You might possibly set up a new server
with all of the current niceties for moving toward a LAMP-like stack
but run your present operating system as a VM on it.  That doesn't
help with your current reasons for moving.  But it might allow you to
migrate parts at a time and keep legacy parts static for a while and
spread out the pain of doing the migration.  And having Microsoft
running as a VM can make recovery from an attack easier.  Just a
thought.

Bob


More information about the NCLUG mailing list