Does X affect machine performance?

[jlew24asu]

let me start by saying that I'm very new to Linux. I passed my CompTIA linux+ exam but I have little experience actually using linux in production.

my company is launching a new set of servers that will hold proprietary software programs in the trading industry.

the boss (who has little linux experience as well) is installing all of the new linux machines with no X program. He intends on all machines to be command line based from putty. his thought process is that X will hurt performance of the machines. is this true?

thanks

[Irithori]

The answer is yes.
Any running process uses resources.

But one needs to see that in perspective:
A started, but unused X system will more or less "just" take some ram.

I still agree with your boss:
From a package pov: The X system consists of many packages and dependencies, hence adding complexity.
Security pov: Any additional process opens an potential attack vector. X can be used over the network, so it might even open remote exploits.
Useability pov: Usually unix servers do not need a gui.
In fact, I would argue that maintenance is much simpler, faster and more deterministic via console/ssh/puppet.

Imho, there is no point in installing an X system, if it isnt needed.


P.S.:
Ymmv, but for real work you might want to consider replacing putty with a more complete working environment.
Some run a native BSD/linux/solaris on their workstations, others cygwin under windows.
I would be in the first group, but my corporate guidelines demand a windows as primary OS. So I run linux VMs

[jlew24asu]

thanks. I had a feeling that was the case. and I agree, so far I do like cygwin better then putty.