T O P

When your writer node is suffixed with "-ro"

When your writer node is suffixed with "-ro"

parens-r-us

Right only


mycarrysun

Ruh ro


gigolo_beast

Fus-dah-ro


SirNamesAlotx

Some people like to watch the world burn


Astrokiwi

Actually, in Bajoran it's traditional for the "Ro" to go first.


[deleted]

Whenever people talk about enterprise code, I wonder how their bad coding practices relate NCC1701


luschinke

rite only 😂


zopad

I don't get it.


DaDi-_-

read-only maybe


[deleted]

[удалено]


tuckmuck203

no it means "read-out" as in you should read out loud the binary to a speech to text processor to run it


alexdapineapple

i think it means "red olive" or maybe that was just a very small tomato


BakuhatsuK

It's "red oil", the kind of lubricant you're supposed to use when performing maintenance to the DB.


Autoradiograph

Underlibricated database spindles is a major cause of internet outage to this day.


DerGsicht

The machine spirits must be appeased


alexdapineapple

i think it means "red olive". that or it was a very small tomato


HecknChonker

The entire point of having multiple database instances with replication is so that if your writer node fails one of the other instances can take over with no downtime. They can also fail-over during maintenance or upgrades. You never want to include read-only in the instance name, because you don't have any control over when failovers happen as they are usually automatic.


[deleted]

[удалено]


HecknChonker

The replicas have to replicate all the same writes that the main database does, so what load are you saving? And again, the writer instance can and should change over time.


[deleted]

[удалено]


bdubdodge

He's not "just wrong". You're both right (depending on the technology). Failover is a different need from read availability. A transactionally consistent slave provides both functions of providing availability and fault tolerance. Though you'd really want three. Idea if you're expecting to support the same level of availability during a failover.


koborIvers

Check event history they might have failed over at some point


BakuhatsuK

Is that how AWS DB clusters work? (Genuine question)


rushlink1

Yes they switch all the time. I think usually when updates require a restart or something. It’s annoying because if you have to use the IP, that also changes.


BakuhatsuK

Wth, then why would you call them using a "-ro" suffix, wouldn't it make more sense to just call them -1 and -2? (or maybe letters, or colors as in blue-green deployment) Edit: Spelling


rushlink1

Yeah that's what we do now. 1,2,3,4 When I was first messing around with them, I named them "primary" and "backup" or something. After I understood how the failover worked, I changed them to 1,2


HecknChonker

You wouldn't. The real horror here is the instance naming, not that the writer changed.


DrStalker

/r/sysadminhorror


techie2200

Could be Romanian


TheBeasSneeze

Someone had to scale up or fail over I'm guessing. Bad naming convention though.


SalamanderPop

Worse yet if that's the developers initials.


ReelTooReal

RO stands for "rectal orifice" because the writer just dumps shit into the database.


No_Substance_3931

Yeah it’s rite only. What part of that is so difficult to understand? /s


sarperen2004

\-ろ


ahoy_butternuts

Ruh-ro


24032014

Romanian?


putneyj

It actually probably started out as a replica and then failed over to become the writer


thaynem

This is because AWS will awitch the reader and writer nodes whenever maintenance is done on the cluster. So naming one node as a reader or writer won't be accurate for long.