Hacker News Reader

Comment by jb1991 | Hacker News Reader

jb1991

I sometimes wonder if the database would be more widely used if they had picked a different name.

My 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.

To put it somewhat irreverently: running large production databases is not for the squeamish.

The 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.

I 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!

I don't wonder. It would be more widely considered, at the very least, judging by interactions I've had with a few people.

I 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.

Why are you wasting the time of half the room talking about technical decisions they wouldn't understand

It’s called a “design review” and they’re quite pervasive. What a strange question.

You 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.

the worst name in existence

I think Mongo is way worse tbh

lol like blazing saddles

Reply on news.ycombinator.com