Re: RepOrigin vs. replorigin

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