couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Joan Touzet (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (COUCHDB-2248) Replace "master" and "slave" terminology
Date Mon, 26 May 2014 23:53:01 GMT


Joan Touzet commented on COUCHDB-2248:

1. We have no references to slave that describe CouchDB, only a mention in passing with respect
to other databases. We have *never* referred to any CouchDB server in documentation or examples
using the term "slave."
2. Multi-master implies *everyone* is a master. This is not racially charged and is sex-positive.
It is, in fact, empowering and supportive of equanimity across many diverse demographics -
every CouchDB is master of its own data domain.
3. Multi-master replication is an industry term that is well recognized, enough to have its
own Wikipedia page:  We do ourselves
a disservice to stop using this term.
4. The proposed term "primary" suggests that there is a "write master," a dangerous assertion
that will give people the wrong impression about our technology. We should be proud not to
have write masters in clustered BigCouch / merged CouchDB architectures.
5. Replica-replica-replication sounds too redundant and does not provide the semantic nuance
that writes can be made in both replicas. It also suggests a failover cluster model which,
again, is not what CouchDB provides.

Proposal: leave everything in the repo as is. If you want to be racially positive and loudly
denounce human slavery as wrong and use our project as a platform for that, you should instead
proudly promote that CouchDB makes a slave of no one, and empowers everyone to be the master
of their data, no matter how many replicas there are of it.

> Replace "master" and "slave" terminology
> ----------------------------------------
>                 Key: COUCHDB-2248
>                 URL:
>             Project: CouchDB
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>          Components: Documentation
>            Reporter: Noah Slater
>            Priority: Trivial
> Inspired by the comments on this PR:
> Summary is: `master` and `slave` are racially charged terms, and it would be good to
avoid them. Django have gone for `primary` and `replica`. But we also have to deal with what
we now call multi-master setups. I propose "peer to peer" as a replacement, or just "peer"
if you're describing one node.
> As far as I can tell, the primary work here is the docs. The wiki and any supporting
material can be updated after.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message