New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixes #22667. Replaced leader/follower terminology with primary/replica #2694

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@fcurella
Contributor

fcurella commented May 20, 2014

No description provided.

@@ -649,10 +649,11 @@ Default: ``None``
The alias of the database that this database should mirror during
testing.
This setting exists to allow for testing of leader/follower
This setting exists to allow for testing of primary/replica
(referred to as master/slave by some databases)

This comment has been minimized.

@fcurella

fcurella May 20, 2014

Contributor

not sure I want to keep referring to the old terminology and keep perpetrating old habits.

@fcurella

fcurella May 20, 2014

Contributor

not sure I want to keep referring to the old terminology and keep perpetrating old habits.

This comment has been minimized.

@aaugustin

aaugustin May 20, 2014

Member

The master/slave terminology is so prevalent that it's worth pointing out that that primary/replica is exactly the same concept.

@aaugustin

aaugustin May 20, 2014

Member

The master/slave terminology is so prevalent that it's worth pointing out that that primary/replica is exactly the same concept.

This comment has been minimized.

@fcurella

fcurella May 20, 2014

Contributor

ok

@fcurella

fcurella May 20, 2014

Contributor

ok

@aaugustin

View changes

Show outdated Hide outdated docs/topics/db/multi-db.txt Outdated
@evildmp

View changes

Show outdated Hide outdated docs/topics/db/multi-db.txt Outdated
@evildmp

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@evildmp

evildmp May 21, 2014

Contributor

Sometimes primary/replica is used, and sometimes primary-replica.

It's not clear to me that these documents are maintaining a clear distinction in meaning between the two forms.

x/y can signify a pair of things, but also a disjunction ('or') of items (they're alternatives, for example).

x-y implies a pair or a connection; it doesn't have the latter meaning.

If there is no difference being implied by the different forms, then I would prefer that we use the same one throughout, because seeing two different ones could cause doubt in a reader's mind.

Other than that, and if 'primary/replica' is both technically correct and easily understandable to most people, then it looks good to me.

Contributor

evildmp commented May 21, 2014

Sometimes primary/replica is used, and sometimes primary-replica.

It's not clear to me that these documents are maintaining a clear distinction in meaning between the two forms.

x/y can signify a pair of things, but also a disjunction ('or') of items (they're alternatives, for example).

x-y implies a pair or a connection; it doesn't have the latter meaning.

If there is no difference being implied by the different forms, then I would prefer that we use the same one throughout, because seeing two different ones could cause doubt in a reader's mind.

Other than that, and if 'primary/replica' is both technically correct and easily understandable to most people, then it looks good to me.

@fcurella

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fcurella

fcurella May 21, 2014

Contributor

I think we can change to always use primary/replica without the risk of adding any confusion

Contributor

fcurella commented May 21, 2014

I think we can change to always use primary/replica without the risk of adding any confusion

@fcurella

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@fcurella

fcurella May 21, 2014

Contributor

FWIW, the only occurrencies of primary-replica are in a test file.

Contributor

fcurella commented May 21, 2014

FWIW, the only occurrencies of primary-replica are in a test file.

@timgraham

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@timgraham

timgraham May 22, 2014

Member

merged in beec056.

Member

timgraham commented May 22, 2014

merged in beec056.

@timgraham timgraham closed this May 22, 2014

@itcreator

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment