On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 9:15 PM Jonathan Gonzalez V. <[email protected]> wrote: > > Peter Smith <[email protected]> writes: > ... > > 2. > > + <para> > > + Reconstructs the <command>CREATE PUBLICATION</command> statement > > for > > + the specified publication (by OID or name), followed by an > > + <command>ALTER PUBLICATION ... OWNER TO</command> statement (the > > + <command>CREATE PUBLICATION</command> grammar has no > > + <literal>OWNER</literal> clause). Each statement is returned as a > > + separate row. An error is raised if no publication with the > > supplied > > + OID or name exists. When the publication was created with > > + <literal>FOR ALL TABLES, ALL SEQUENCES</literal>, the emitted > > + statement always lists <literal>ALL TABLES</literal> before > > + <literal>ALL SEQUENCES</literal> regardless of the original order. > > + The following options are supported: > > + <literal>pretty</literal> (boolean) for formatted output and > > + <literal>owner</literal> (boolean) to include > > + <literal>OWNER</literal>. > > + </para></entry> > > > > 2a. > > That "CREATE PUBLICATION" should <link> back to the CREATE PUBLICATION > > docs page. > > This is indeed a good idea, I would love to see this also in the other > patchs, probably another patch to update all the functions will be good. > Applied for the next version > ... > > > ~~~ > > > > GENERAL > > > > 3. > > It would be better if the the rows of "Table 9.96" were in alphabetical > > order. > > I think that this should be done in a different patch when all or a big > part of the functions are merged. >
FYI, I've created another thread [1] to address those things above, ====== [1] https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAHut+Pun9Z8qZFJTa9fLgdhM=cip9d-cnx2yxdw6efrswbq...@mail.gmail.com Kind Regards, Peter Smith. Fujitsu Australia
