On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 03:01:44PM +0530, Akshay Joshi wrote:
> In my previous email, I included two different patches (for two separate
> approaches) from different branches. As a result, CommitFest is indicating
> that a rebase is required.
>
> Apologies for the inconvenience, I’m still getting familiar with the
> process.
>
> Attached are the patches, layered one on top of the other, representing two
> approaches:
>
> - *Double Dash*:
> v8-0001-Add-pg_get_database_ddl-function-to-reconstruct-double-dash.patch
> - *DefElem (Key-Value)*:
> v8-0002-Add-pg_get_database_ddl-function-to-reconstruct-DefElem.patch
>
> I am now submitting the *v8 patches*, which are ready for review. Please
> let me know which approach you find more suitable and preferable.
I have some documentation style suggestions that I've also attached as a patch:
* Update the pg_get_database_ddl() definitions in the func-info table to list
the multiple database way to reference a database, similar to
pg_database_size()
* Shorten the argument description for OID and name, again similar to
pg_database_size()'s style
* Shorten ddl_options argument description to simply options, to match the
style of how other functions in the docs describe optional parameters
* Remove the redundant explanation of the optional parameters in the individual
function's description, and instead refer the reader to the explanation
following the table
* Some word choice and phrasing changes in the pg_get_database_ddl function
description to be grammatically closer to something like
pg_restore_relation_stats()
I hope that is helpful...
Regards,
Mark
--
Mark Wong <markwkm@gmail.com>
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
