4 ms·
I sometimes wonder if the database would be more widely used if they had picked a different name.
by jb1991 3y ago
I sometimes wonder if the database would be more widely used if they had picked a different name.
- swsieber 3y agoI don't wonder. It would be more widely considered, at the very least, judging by interactions I've had with a few people.
- dgfitz 3y agoI couldn’t imagine suggesting cockroachDB in a planning meeting for a new product. Especially when over half the room isn’t engineering. Just won’t happen.
- Exuma 3y agothe worst name in existence
- echelon 3y agoYou know how "master", "slave", "blacklist", etc. cause bad feelings in a lot of people? So do terms like "roach", "cock", "cockroach", "maggot", etc. They could have named this waterbear or adamantium or something.
- big_whack 3y agoMy guess is orgs that have a real need for a distributed SQL database (which are rare in the space of orgs) will make their choices based on requirements analysis rather than naming. So probably if you would be turned off enough by the name not to use the software, you don't actually need a distributed SQL database and are not the target customer.
- michae2 3y agoTo put it somewhat irreverently: running large production databases is not for the squeamish.
- bradleyjg 3y agoThe flip side of that is that businesses are more than okay with selling their products to organizations for which it’s overkill. Gyms know that people that sign up on Jan 2 don’t need annual (or any) membership. They take their money anyway. The more honorable ones allow cancellation or something but I don’t think anyone expects them to actively turn these folks away.
- brianmcc 3y agoI think a lot of people miss the "Cockroaches survive everything" implication. It's meant to imply indestructability, not creepy yucky beastliness. Obviously that goes over the heads of many people initially but at least it can then be explained!