RepOrigin vs. replorigin

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.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.

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

On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 8:15 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:

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

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

On Jan 28, 2026, at 03:43, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 8:15 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:

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

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/

On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 2:24 PM Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com> wrote:

On Jan 28, 2026, at 03:43, Masahiko Sawada <sawada.mshk@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 8:15 AM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:

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

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.

Thank you for reviewing the patch. Pushed.

Regards,

--
Masahiko Sawada
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com