RE: doc patch: clarify the naming rule for injection_points

Dear Aleksander,

> ```
> - their own code using the same macro.
> + their own code using the same macro. The name of injection points must
> be
> + lower characters, and dashes must separate its terms.
> ```
>
> Perhaps "must" is a too strong statement. I suggest something like:
>
> """
> By convention, the name of injection points ...
> """

It is always difficult for me to distinguish them, thanks for comments.
PSA updated.

>
> I have mixed feelings about the patch overall though. This would mean
> that we need to rename injection points like this:
>
> ``
> AtEOXact_Inval-with-transInvalInfo
> heap_update-before-pin
> ```
>
> Otherwise we would contradict our own documentation.

Thanks for telling these counterexamples. I grepped with "INJECTION_POINTS" and
"IS_INJECTION_POINT_ATTACHED", and no others are found.

> I don't mind heap-update-before-pin, but not 100% sure if:
>
> at-eo-xact-inval-with-trans-inval-info
>
> ... would be a better name than the current one.

I also feel just converting lower case is not good. The point seems to locate in
the end-of-transaction callback and it accepts invalidation messages. Based on the
fact, how about "inval-process-invalidation-messages"?
0002 did simple replacements of these words.

Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED