Re: RepOrigin vs. replorigin

> On Jan 28, 2026, at 03:43, Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 8:15 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> wrote:
>>
>> On 27.01.26 12:02, Amit Kapila wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 2:55 AM Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)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
>>
>
> Thank you for the comments! I agree to unify the naming.
>
> I'm going to push the attached patch, barring any objections.
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Masahiko Sawada
> Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
> <v1-0001-Standardize-replication-origin-naming-to-use-Repl.patch>

This patch is a pure rename from RepOriginId/InvalidRepOriginId to ReplOriginId/InvalidReplOriginId. I applied it locally, build passed, “make check” passed. And I searched over the source tree for any missing replacement and found none. So, LGTM.

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/