| From: | Masahiko Sawada <sawada(dot)mshk(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | RepOrigin vs. replorigin |
| Date: | 2026-01-26 21:24:27 |
| Message-ID: | CAD21AoBDgm3hDqUZ+nqu=ViHmkCnJBuJyaxG_yvv27BAi2zBmQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi all,
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?"
Regards,
--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mihail Nikalayeu | 2026-01-26 21:33:00 | Re: Issues with ON CONFLICT UPDATE and REINDEX CONCURRENTLY |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2026-01-26 20:31:07 | Re: pg_upgrade: optimize replication slot caught-up check |