Re: Retail DDL - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Kirill Reshke
Subject Re: Retail DDL
Date
Msg-id CALdSSPh8QeDfDt9Ap5vaZytHafBzXMgNjEM7nDKj465UvROppw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Retail DDL  (Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>)
Responses Re: Retail DDL
List pgsql-hackers
Hi!

On Thu, 14 Aug 2025 at 23:30, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> wrote:
>
> Interesting. I think there are good reasons to have this as builtin
> functions, though, not least that it would allow us to base some psql
> meta-commands on it, or possibly an SQL command (DESCRIBE ?).

DESCRIBE would be confusing with extended protocol Describe message,
used for prepared statements and portals. At least for me this would
be confusing.

> Builtin
> functions are also likely to be faster.

We are not actually aiming for speed here, aren’t we?


Overall, Im +1 on `pg_get_{objecttype}_ddl` or  maybe
`pg_show_{objecttype}_ddl` design.

--
Best regards,
Kirill Reshke



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Let's get rid of the freelist and the buffer_strategy_lock
Next
From: Tatsuo Ishii
Date:
Subject: Re: Raw parse tree is not dumped to log