Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_policy_ddl() function to reconstruct CREATE POLICY statement

>> The get_formatted_string function is needed. Instead of using multiple if
> statements for the pretty flag, it’s better to have a generic function.
> This will be useful if the pretty-format DDL implementation is accepted by
> the community, as it can be reused by other pg_get_<object>_ddl() DDL
> functions added in the future.
>
>>
>> in pg_get_triggerdef_worker, I found the below code pattern:
>> /*
>> * In non-pretty mode, always schema-qualify the target table name for
>> * safety. In pretty mode, schema-qualify only if not visible.
>> */
>> appendStringInfo(&buf, " ON %s ",
>> pretty ?
>> generate_relation_name(trigrec->tgrelid, NIL) :
>> generate_qualified_relation_name(trigrec->tgrelid));
>>
>> maybe we can apply it too while construct query string:
>> "CREATE POLICY %s ON %s",
>>
>
> In my opinion, the table name should always be schema-qualified, which I
> have addressed in the v4 patch. The implementation of the pretty flag
> here differs from pg_get_triggerdef_worker, which is used only for the
> target table name. In my patch, the pretty flag adds \t and \n to each
> different clause (example AS, FOR, USING ...)
>
>

I think that's where the confusion lies with adding `pretty` to the DDL
functions. The `pretty` flag set to `true` on other functions is used to
"not" show the schema name. But in the case of this function, it is used to
format the statement. I wonder if the word `format` or `pretty_format` is a
better name? `pretty` itself in the codebase isn't a very clear name
regardless.

--
Best,
Phil Alger