couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexander Shorin (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (COUCHDB-2248) Replace "master" and "slave" terminology
Date Wed, 28 May 2014 15:38:03 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-2248?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14011214#comment-14011214
] 

Alexander Shorin commented on COUCHDB-2248:
-------------------------------------------

>> there is no "master/replica" known replication topology. It's was always named as
"master-slave".

> This is false. Engine Yard refers to this setup as master/replica. So do the Django docs
now. The term "database replica" has 24,100 hits in Google. 

"database replica" means not the same as "master/slave" - different terms, with different
meaning. That's the current root of the misunderstood between us.  Replacing "master/slave"
with "master/replica" makes no sense since:

1. It clashes with Master Replica term
2. It doesn't have any references to Authority sources (only IBM docs with own use-case context)
3. Google doesn't helps with any search by "master/replica"

Removing the term is looks as a workaround for me: we can remove the word from docs, but we
cannot remove ability to support such replication case and we have somehow name it if we'll
being asked about.

> Replace "master" and "slave" terminology
> ----------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: COUCHDB-2248
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/COUCHDB-2248
>             Project: CouchDB
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: public(Regular issues) 
>          Components: Documentation
>            Reporter: Noah Slater
>            Priority: Trivial
>
> Inspired by the comments on this PR:
> https://github.com/django/django/pull/2692
> 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
(v6.2#6252)

Mime
View raw message