On 2018/05/09 11:20, Michael Paquier wrote:
> While looking at this code, is there any reason to not make
> gen_partprune_steps static? This is only used in partprune.c for now,
> so the intention is to make it available for future patches?
Yeah, making it static might be a good idea. I had made it externally
visible, because I was under the impression that the runtime pruning
related code would want to call it from elsewhere within the planner.
But, instead it introduced a make_partition_pruneinfo() which in turn
calls get_partprune_steps.
Thanks,
Amit