6 ms·
primary/secondary is even an alternative to master/slave? To me it means that they're on the same level and can do the same thing, while master means that it op
by slezyr 6y ago
primary/secondary is even an alternative to master/slave? To me it means that they're on the same level and can do the same thing, while master means that it operates over slave devices.
- bryanrasmussen 6y agomaybe controlling/controlled
- DonHopkins 6y agoOr top/bottom. But that gets more nuanced, because you also have "power bottoms" and "service tops". https://www.reddit.com/r/gaybros/comments/68rrmi/whats_the_inverse_of_a_power_bottom/ https://www.reddit.com/r/gaybros/comments/68rrmi/whats_the_i...
- isoprophlex 6y agoThere's also leader/follower if you are looking to replace master/slave.
- slezyr 6y agoNot really, to me "leader" sounds like it do some of the same work as "follower", which often is not.
- akvadrako 6y agoThere is often no following involved. It's often about one process being in charge and other's doing what they are told. I suppose manager and worker would make sense.
- DonHopkins 6y agoTeacher / Student is better for database replication, since a "School" of databases can have multiple teachers and students, and it refers to the flow of information.
- microcolonel 6y agoHow dare you prefer plain language! Somebody somewhere thinks USB devices are people so it's time to shut up and listen. It's so sad to see the most dishonest, bad-faith arguments and ideas take over society. Hopefully the people enabling this will be held to account, in due time.
- karpour 6y agoYou do realize that for USB it is called host/client? I saw a huge reddit thread with people whining about some social media platform changing their internal coding conventions. People who will never even see or notice those changes. There are a lot of things to be upset about, but this is not one of them. If you disagree with the kernel naming guidelines you are free to create your own fork. Good luck.
- randompwd 6y ago> If you disagree with the kernel naming guidelines you are free to create your own fork. Good luck. You do realise that cuts both ways. Why did some people raise this issue in the first place - according to your logic, they should have just forked it. Silly arguments like this don't contribute to the discussion in any meaningful way.
- karpour 6y agoOf course I realize that, if you think I didn't you're missing my point. The naming conventions changed, and the kernel will run just as well either way. I personally don't care what a blacklist/blocklist is called, as long as things are clear and consistent. In some cases we will likely end up with even clearer terms. What disappoints me more is how much of an outcry there is over a simple naming convention change. Can you explain to me why you seem to have such a strong opinion on this issue?
- DonHopkins 6y agoForks don't cut both ways, knives do! How about renaming forks to sporks, to be more inclusive of spoons?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- dx87 6y agoI think that if people really want to change the terminology, master/minion would be a good alternative.
- slezyr 6y agoActually, I almost like it. I would gladly use overlord/minion as a replacement.
- fabian2k 6y agoprimary/replica is the terminology I've seen for the database case, which does describe the situation better than master/slave in my opinion. Master/Slave is kind of overloaded terminology, and the replacements in other areas will certainly be different.
- nemetroid 6y agoATA master/slave is an example where both devices have the same capabilities.
- benaadams 6y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_ATA#Master_and_slave_clarification https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_ATA#Master_and_slave_... > Although they were in common use, the terms "master" and "slave" do not appear anymore in current versions of the ATA specifications, or any current documentation. Since ATA-2 the two devices are referred to as "Device 0" and "Device 1", respectively. This is more appropriate since the two devices have always operated, since the earliest ATA specification, as equal peers on the cable, with neither having control or priority over the other. > It is a common myth that the controller on the master drive assumes control over the slave drive, or that the master drive may claim priority of communication over the other device on the same ATA interface. In fact, the drivers in the host operating system perform the necessary arbitration and serialization, and each drive's onboard controller operates independently of the other. > While it may have remained in colloquial use, the PC industry has not used ATA master/slave terminology in many years.
- sebazzz 6y agoThe I2C protocol is not however - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%C2%B2C#Design https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%C2%B2C#Design. The slave listens to the master and responds when asked to.
- ntsplnkv2 6y agoHow about parent and child?
- yakshaving_jgt 6y agoAre you looking to offend orphans?
- DonHopkins 6y agoThe problem with "parent/child" relationships for trees is that humans always have two biological parents, not one like tree data structures.
- acdha 6y agoThis is a good example of why master/slave is not an accurate term: most technical uses reflect performing the same kind of work rather than one only telling the other what to do and when the master fails a slave is elected to replace it. Your master database doesn’t torture the slave node when it errors, either. Using more accurate terms such as those on the kernel’s list immediately tells you the nature of the relationship AND doesn’t make anyone uncomfortable. That seems worth it alone, and it’s really unclear what good reason could explain why a few people would spend far more time complaining about work which someone else will do than it will take to complete that work.