As it pertains to Solr, I've often used Master and Searcher. Probably even more correct would be Indexer and Searcher. Primary and Secondary don't quite sound right for the Solr situation... (but Master and Slave doesn't capture it any better either).
-Yonik On 7/26/07, Sundling, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When I started computing it was always Master and Slave. In the last > several years I've seen people use Primary and Secondary instead. When > I saw the old style I looked it up and this is what I found: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master-slave_%28computers%29 > > http://www.techspot.com/news/9129-master-and-slave-computer-labels-unacc > eptable.html > > http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/11/26/1069825847240.html > > Is it was worth changing the terminology from master/slave to > primary/secondary? > > My personal feeling is that the original impetus behind some of the > change was ridiculous, but it's a simple change to make. Consider this > a thought bubble, not a request. > > Paul Sundling >
