I am looking for a comparison between Windows and Linux media agents. I have done some testing between the two and not seeing anything that will make me say “Yes, we need to do Linux now!” I am actually seeing that I would have to deploy additional infrastructure for items like Live Browse if I went to Linux as Windows proxies would be needed.
Any suggestions are appreciated.
This string is more on the mount which I do not have a concern. I am more concerned if I move to Linux what features will I lose?
Cost and Expertise.
How much do you pay for licensing for windows vs Linux?
do you have a competent team of Windows engineers to troubleshoot issues? Do you have a competent team of Linux engineers to manage and troubleshoot issues?
Personally i have found Linux easier to manage and deploy and deploy as media agents, in fact you can just abuse the proxy templates for 99 percent of use cases.
Hello
There is no functional difference between Linux and Windows MediaAgents. There are differences between how the DDB is configured, for example Linux uses VolumeGroups and Logical Volumes, and, what types of storage protocols can be used. For example, Windows can use local disks & SMB targets, while Linux can use local disks and NFS targets. Both can use Cloud Storage.
Thank you,
Collin
Thanks everyone
Enter your E-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
