Re: pg_get__*_ddl consolidation

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>, Euler Taveira <euler(at)eulerto(dot)com>
Cc: "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com>, japin <japinli(at)hotmail(dot)com>, Zsolt Parragi <zsolt(dot)parragi(at)percona(dot)com>, Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)kurilemu(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: pg_get__*_ddl consolidation
Date: 2026-06-28 19:57:50
Message-ID: 62b458be-5825-4b22-9d79-bf6e0fcf60eb@dunslane.net
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers


On 2026-06-24 We 3:48 PM, Jelte Fennema-Nio wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Apr 2026 at 14:36, Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> wrote:
>> So to summarize (from my biased viewpoint) I think the downsides are:
>> 1. Uncommon calling convention: only pg_restore_*_stats and
>> pg_logical_slot_*_changes use it, while all other functions support
>> named parameters.
>> 2. Needs custom option parsing logic
>> 3. More characters to type because you have to quote booleans, integers
>> and argument names.
>> 4. Requires functions to be marked as NOSTRICT, which then needs
>> additional NULL handling
>> 5. It can be unclear to a reader of a query that the function arguments
>> should be interpreted as key-value pair
>> 6. Breaks auto formatting
>>
>> And the benefit:
>> 1. Forces people to specify the argument name
>>
>> I don't think those benefits outweigh the downsides.
> I'm not sure how I can explain my argument better. I think it'd be sad
> if we standardized these pg_get_ddl_* functions to use this suboptimal
> calling convention.
>
>

I have applied your patch with slight tweaks.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Previous Message Peter Smith 2026-06-28 19:53:23 Re: doc: fix two id/xreflabel inconsistencies in config.sgml