Re: pg_get_*_ddl() needs a redesign

From: Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>
To: Mario González <gonzalemario(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Melanie Plageman <melanieplageman(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: pg_get_*_ddl() needs a redesign
Date: 2026-10-20 17:16:56
Message-ID: 20261020171656.c7.noahmisch@microsoft.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 19, 2026 at 01:03:59PM -0300, Mario González wrote:
> Questions where I'd need confirmation
> -------------------------------------

You've asked me some specific questions, but the larger problem is the email's
summary oversimplifying the upthread points from Tom, Andres, Robert, and me.
I wouldn't recommend proceeding. A successful project for $SUBJECT needs
someone accountable for auditing each iteration against the feedback to date,
point by point. I don't have capacity to take that role.

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Previous Message Bharath Rupireddy 2026-10-20 17:09:14 Re: Parallel vacuum: check XID wraparound failsafe between indexes