A quick note on a design change I made in the pg_get_table_ddl option surface
Much better now.
All options can be present or omitted, so why couldn't the owner also be part of the include/exclude options too ?
Just one addition, some options are plural and others are not.
We have indexes, policies, triggers, but we also have check, unique, exclusion.
You don't know how many indices or checks you have, so wouldn't it be better to have them in singular form ?
Regarding moving owner into the include/exclude syntax, I prefer keeping it as a top-level boolean for now: 1) It aligns with existing sibling functions (pg_get_role_ddl, pg_get_tablespace_ddl, and pg_get_database_ddl), which all use a boolean owner. 2) Existing regression tests and early callers pass owner => false for output stability. Moving this into the exclude list would create unnecessary churn that I'd prefer to avoid bundling here.
As for the naming inconsistency (singular vs. plural), you're entirely right mixing indexes/policies/triggers with checks/uniques/exclusions was an oversight. Note that I left statistics alone to match the CREATE STATISTICS keyword.
I'll address the naming consistency in the next patch.
