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.)
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.
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.)
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.