It sounds way less offensive to those who decry the original terminology’s problematic roots but still keeps its meaning intact.

  • Zozano@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Oh man, wait till they hear about how I riced both my master and slave servers. I threw so many RGB LEDs on them, they look like recipients of a Fukoshima clown bukkake.

  • Semi-Hemi-Lemmygod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’ve switched over to using primary/replica for database stuff because it’s more accurate. The replicas don’t always behave themselves so calling them “slaves” implies a level of obedience to the “master” that they don’t have.

  • flop_leash_973@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    I personally think the whole backlash against master/slave in the computing world is people looking for something in their sphere of knowledge to be offended about so they can feel like they are part of “a movement”. Even if some mustache twirling racist was the first “computer guy” to come up with the term and meant it to be offensive, that is not how sane people view it today. So some of the advocates for changing it should stop trying to build it up into some Pizzagate-like conspiracy against black/brown people.

    Having said that, I also don’t have any strong attachments to the phrasing either. Phase it out in favor of something that makes everyone happy if that keeps the peace. It is just a term that made sense at the time to describe something. There is nothing stopping us from changing it to something else now if we so choose. It is not erasing heritage or some such nonsense. If anything, people having strong hangups about it if there are better or equally as good terms out there that doesn’t make people uncomfortable is far weirder in my opinion.

    The only thing I have somewhat strong opinions about is making it some high priority to go back and erase those terms from solutions that already exist. Change them as you update things, sure, but why create extra work to update something old that is currently working if the only change is not functional and just verbiage. Seems like wasted effort that could be better directed and solving functional issues to me.

    • peopleproblems@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Gotta be careful with that one when talking data streams though.

      A pub/sub pattern implemented for message queue flow is available in most cloud (and on prem) solutions.