Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2026 11:17:15 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20260702.111715.277646207293239004.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
To: akshay.joshi@enterprisedb.com
Cc: zsolt.parragi@percona.com, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_table_ddl() to reconstruct CREATE TABLE
 statements
From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota.ntt@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CANxoLDdVEjCCKch1O-5J6ghw89b2fkWC1ADPYTUwxu8WB-hQbw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CANxoLDd0KT+5fHOyTi0Fu5Jwme0+a5S2aAVj=iCVsqkpvF_2TA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAN4CZFPxokhJ2vTiTu9Bhj+v7T+5jZd4pjT7QXdjoZ4Vqv5KhQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANxoLDdVEjCCKch1O-5J6ghw89b2fkWC1ADPYTUwxu8WB-hQbw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mew version 6.8 on Emacs 29.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20260702.111715.277646207293239004.horikyota.ntt%40gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

Looking at this, one thing that concerns me is the large amount of
overlap with dumpTableSchema() in pg_dump.

I wonder if it would make sense to separate the SQL generation logic
into frontend/backend-shared code so that it could also be used by
pg_dump. The catalog lookup would naturally remain separate, but
sharing the DDL generation itself would significantly reduce the
duplication.

By the way, a couple of comments use a Unicode RIGHTWARDS ARROW
(U+2192). Please use an ASCII equivalent instead.

Regards,

-- 
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center