accumulo-notifications mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Christopher Tubbs (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (ACCUMULO-2844) Remove master/slave terminology
Date Wed, 04 Jun 2014 00:00:07 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2844?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14017273#comment-14017273
] 

Christopher Tubbs commented on ACCUMULO-2844:
---------------------------------------------

First, I'd like to point out that "slave" is only unconscionable when it describes the slavery
of humans or suggests that analogy. It is not necessarily an issue when describing other things,
such as machinery or code controlled by other machinery/code, or metaphors (as in "I'm a slave
to my past" or "He's a slave to his desires" or "She's a slave to chocolate"). It is not *inherently*
an objectionable word. It just has objectionable uses/contexts. As such, I don't think this
proposed change is strictly necessary or useful. In general, I'm opposed to banning words,
especially when there are useful contexts available for those words.

However, I do understand how even the use of the word could be perceived as objectionable,
due to the way it serves as a historical reminder of atrocities against human beings, and
I'm sensitive to the fact that others have different perspectives and opinions on this. Since
we can make changes that accommodate those differences, I'm in favor of doing so, to promote
a more inclusive and welcoming community.

That said, I really think "master" is okay to retain. While it does effectively invoke the
connotation of "ownership", it does not need to be "slaves" that are what is owned. It works
in other contexts than that of "slaves", such as "master of a house", "master of a skill",
"master of a degree", etc. In fact, the "master of a skill" usage is probably the most appropriate
to our use of it anyway, since the master server is really there to perform some specific
specialized functionality, like assignment/balancing, and user operations, more than it actually
controlled the other servers. So, I see no reason to change "master" at this point, as it's
too invasive and largely unnecessary (certainly not in the bugfix branches, but perhaps in
future to be more descriptive in the specialized functions it provides). I think removing
only the "slaves" term sufficiently addresses the "master/slave" analogy here.

For "slaves", I think simply "tservers" would be appropriate, as proposed. Changing this terminology
mostly involves changing the "slaves" configuration file, which isn't even really part of
Accumulo itself... just some cluster-management scripts that are shipped with it, and its
associated documentation. This is very superficial change, and satisfies the goals of this
ticket, without being as invasive as changing "master" would be. I think this change can be
done in bugfix branches, so long as the scripts will fall back on the old "slaves" file for
backwards compatibility, if it exists. We can phase it out in future versions as we would
anything else in the public API.

(I concur with the proposed primary/replica terminology)

In short:
* -1 to changing "Master" terminology in bugfix branches (unnecessary, too invasive, disruptive
to existing users, problems with serialization/compatibility/classpath/packaging expectations)
* +0 to changing "Master" terminology in future versions, provided we can agree on a more
descriptive term (I'd prefer a separate ticket)
* +1 to Primary/Replica terminology (should be a sub-task of ACCUMULO-378)
* +1 to changing "slaves" to "tservers", provided we retain backwards compatibility
* +1 to changing "slaves" to something else for the scalability tests and elsewhere to whatever
is most appropriate for that context


> Remove master/slave terminology
> -------------------------------
>
>                 Key: ACCUMULO-2844
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ACCUMULO-2844
>             Project: Accumulo
>          Issue Type: Task
>    Affects Versions: 1.5.0, 1.5.1, 1.6.0
>            Reporter: Sean Busbey
>            Assignee: Sean Busbey
>             Fix For: 1.5.2, 1.6.1, 1.7.0
>
>
> I'd like to remove our use of master/slave terminology in favor of something that doesn't
carry a racially charged meaning.
> As a side effect I'd also like to pick names that carry better meaning of how things
work within Accumulo.
> In the case of a single cluster, I'd like to
> * Change the Master role to Coordinator
> * Change the associated master server package to coordinator
> * Change the master configuration file to be named coordinators
> * Change the slaves configuration file to be named tservers
> In the case of the in-progress replication work I'd like to change terminology:
> * use _Primary Cluster_  in place of _Master Cluster_
> * use _Replica Clusters_ in place of _Slave Clusters_
> I intend to do this in all active branches in a way that maintains compatibility of existing
configuration files and serialized actions (i.e. fate operations) within their major branch.
In the current unreleased major branch I expect upgrading will require user action (e.g. renaming
configuration files).



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Mime
View raw message