[nycbug-talk] Sanity check on new naming scheme

[Francisco Reyes]

Isaac Levy writes:

>> but yes, we don't want to put the description in in case the box gets
>> repuropsed, but more so in case the box gets multi-purposed. Can't tell
> 
> Yep.  I guess exceptions perhaps would be special-purpose hw in big clusters, www1, ww2, - or computenode1, computenode2, etc...  where this naming is a part of a social strategy to keep the boxes purpose clear.

I think that in the case of machines with multiple purpose what Ike 
mentioned, separating DNS from naming, is the best option.

Also as Ike mentioned the naming of www1, www2,etc... is when there are 
clear purposes.

For the mixed enviroment a non functional name with functional CNAMES may 
work well.

Regardless to the approach, as others have mentioned you are going to need 
documentation somewhere of what is what. In my case because machines, for 
the most part, are single function it is simple to track and functional 
naming makes administration actually easier.

At work some applications use an include file where targets are defined with 
an array. When there are changes the include file is updated and then 
distributed to all machines. Another possible way may be to have a table in 
a database and your apps connect to get the name/ip of where they have to 
connect for a certain task.