Hello Andres, On Mon, Jan 5, 2026, 21:24 Andres Freund <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 2026-01-01 10:00:00 +0200, Alexander Lakhin wrote: > > bufhdr -> bufHdr > > I just ran into this one due to a rebase conflict. Obviously trivial to > resolve. But what's the point of this change? If you wanted to fix the > arguably wrong name, it'd have to be "buf" or "BufferDesc", as there's no > variable named either bufhdr or bufHdr. > I thought that the initial spelling was meant to reference bufHdr variable as if it was declared locally as we can see this name in other functions in bufmgr.c (at 5d508736). The point was to have no references to entities that you can't find in the source tree. > Having random stuff mixed into these changes is one of the reasons why I so > dislike them. > I'm not sure how to arrange such changes to process them efficiently -- they could be split to multiple "Fix a typo" patches, of course. By the way, I've just noticed that I fixed only one out of two typos in "parititoned", so it's still spelled wrong: "partititoned". Sorry. Best regards, Alexander >
