Re: RepOrigin vs. replorigin - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: RepOrigin vs. replorigin
Date
Msg-id ab3f573e-8218-4665-be62-3bb8ae0055f7@eisentraut.org
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: RepOrigin vs. replorigin  (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: RepOrigin vs. replorigin
List pgsql-hackers
On 27.01.26 12:02, Amit Kapila wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 2:55 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> While reading the code in origin.c, I found the inconsistent use of
>> RepOrigin and replorigin (with an 'l') quite confusing -- especially
>> when trying to determine names for new functions or variables. For
>> instance,
>>
>> - RepOriginId
>> - InvalidRepOriginId
>>
>> - RM_REPLORIGIN_ID
>> - XLOG_REPLORIGIN_{SET|DROP}
>> - replorigin_session_origin
>> - replorigin_session_xxx() functions
>>
>> Is there a conventional rule for choosing one over the other depending
>> on context? Or should we consider unifying these naming conventions?"
>>
> 
> AFAICS, most places use replorigin. So, +1 to unify the naming by
> adding 'l' to places where it is not there unless someone sees a
> theory/reason to keep them different.

agreed




pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Corey Huinker
Date:
Subject: Re: Extended Statistics set/restore/clear functions.
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: pgsql: Prevent invalidation of newly synced replication slots.