• Aurenkin@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Not exactly the same but I remember starting my software engineering course and having to remote into the university servers to write code. All the servers were named after Red Dwarf characters. Being a career changer, as soon as I saw the server names I had this calming feeling that I’d finally found my people and everything was going to be ok.

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      My dad was never at university, but he was a unix admin for ages. his naming conventions for clusters?

      Star Wars characters.
      Red Dwarf Characters.
      Star trek characters.
      Asimov’s robots.
      and apparently, his annoying bosses. (For the troublesome clusters.)

      • HakFoo@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        9 months ago

        I’ve heard it’s a “pets vs cattle” thing. When you have a small fleet of distinct servers, you name them. When you have a thousand interchangeable boxes, you give them systematic IDs.

        Or you scale up to a franchise with a large enough cast. I wonder if anyone uses One Piece character names for servers?

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          9 months ago

          It kind of also depends on how you interact with them- some clusters are interacted with by admin as a single entity; those got names even if they technically represented lots of rackspace; or the hardware that’s running specific groupings of services.

          Like a databases. (Darth Vader was reserved for databases that logged and tracked errors… aka other systems that were, uh, rebellions.)

          • XTL@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            9 months ago

            You give systematic id’s to completely interchangable things. You give unique names to unique things.

            If you name a formal thing (like a physical computer) by its function you have failed at naming. And are probably a manager who doesn’t see that one day you’ll need many things of almost the same function and to tell them apart. Or that one thing will have many functions.