Re: [PATCH] Add pg_get_policy_ddl() function to reconstruct CREATE POLICY statement - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

Hi all,

On Wed, Jul 1, 2026 at 4:01 PM Akshay Joshi
<akshay.joshi@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2026 at 2:44 PM solai v <solai.cdac@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 4:48 PM Akshay Joshi
>> <akshay.joshi@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > All,
>> >
>> > I've updated the patch to align with the interface change introduced by commit d6ed87d1989 (Andrew Dunstan, 2026-06-26 "Use named boolean parameters for pg_get_*_ddl option arguments").
>> >
>> > That commit replaced the VARIADIC text[] alternating key/value option interface with typed named boolean parameters across pg_get_role_ddl(), pg_get_tablespace_ddl(), and pg_get_database_ddl(), removing the DdlOption/parse_ddl_options() machinery in favour of direct PG_GETARG_BOOL() calls.
>> >
>> > Updated patch v14 is ready for review/commit.
>> >
>>
>>
>> I reviewed and tested the v14 patch on the latest master. The patch
>> applied cleanly, built successfully, and passed make check without any
>> regression failures. I verified the new function signature and
>> confirmed that pg_get_policy_ddl() now uses the new interface with the
>> boolean DEFAULT false argument. Also I tested the function with a
>> variety of row-level security policies, including: Basic policy
>> reconstruction, PERMISSIVE and RESTRICTIVE policies, Different command
>> types (SELECT, INSERT, UPDATE, DELETE), Policies with multiple roles
>> and the PUBLIC role, Quoted table, policy, and role names, USING and
>> WITH CHECK clauses, Complex expressions including EXISTS, nested
>> subqueries, CASE expressions, COALESCE, ANY/ALL operators, and boolean
>> expressions, NULL inputs, invalid relation names, and non-existent
>> policies. The generated DDL was correct as per the intent, and the
>> expected errors were verified for the invalid inputs. I also verified
>> that the generated DDL is executable by dropping an existing policy,
>> recreating it using the output of pg_get_policy_ddl(), and confirming
>> that the recreated policy was reconstructed successfully again by the
>> function.
>> One observation I noted is that for policies using default attributes
>> (TO PUBLIC and AS PERMISSIVE), the generated DDL omits those clauses
>> and produces a semantically equivalent statement which seems
>> intentional but thought of sending it here for further clarification.
>> Overall, I did not encounter any functional issues during testing. The
>> patch looks good to me and worked as expected in all the scenarios I
>> tested.
>
>
>     Yes, it's intentional for all pg_get_***_ddl functions. Clause with defaults won't be reconstructed.
>>
>>

Ok. Thank you for the clarification.

Regards,
Solai