Comparison to peer-to-peer architecture

A client/server network involves multiple clients connecting to a single, central server. The file server on a client/server network must have robust hardware configurations to handle large volumes of client service requests. Hence servers usually are high speed computers with large hard disk capacity. 

By contrast, peer-to-peer networks involve two or more computers pooling individual resources such as disk drives, CD-ROMs and printers. These shared resources are available to every computer in the network, while each of them communicates in a session. Each computer acts as both the client and the server which means all the computers on the network are equals, that is where the term peer-to-peer comes from. The advantage of peer-to-peer networking is the easier control concept not requiring any additional coordination entity and not delaying transfers by routing via server entities. However, the collision of session may be larger than with routing via server nodes.

In the peer to peer network, software applications can be installed on the single computer and shared by every computer in the network. They are also cheaper to set up because most desktop operating systems have the software required for the network installed by default. On the other hand, the client/server model works with any size or physical layout of LAN and doesn't tend to slow down with a heavy use.

Peer-to-peer networks are typically less secure than a client/server networks because security is handled by the individual computers, not controlled and supervised on the network as a whole. The resources of the computers in the network can become congested as they have to support not only the workstation user, but also the requests from network users. It may be difficult to provide systemwide services when the client operating system typically used in this type of network is incapable of hosting the service.

Client/server networks with their additional capacities have a higher initial setup cost for networking than peer to peer networks. The long-term aspect of administering a client/server network with applications largely server-hosted surely saves administering effort compared to administering the application settings per each client. In addition the concentration of functions in performant servers allows for lower grade performance qualification of the clients.

It is possible to set up a server on a modern desktop computer, but it is recommended to consider investment in enterprise-wide server facilities with standardised choice of hardware and software and with a systematic and remotely operable administering strategy. It is easier to configure and manage the server hardware and software compared to the distributed administering requirements with a flock of computers.