Re: upper planner path-ification

>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:

>> Hrm, ok. So for the near future, we should leave it more or less
>> as-is? We don't have a timescale yet, but it's our intention to
>> submit a hashagg support patch for grouping sets as soon as time
>> permits.

Tom> Well, mumble. I keep saying that I want to tackle path-ification
Tom> in that area, and I keep not finding the time to actually do it.
Tom> So I'm hesitant to tell you that you should wait on it. But
Tom> certainly I think that it'll be a lot easier to get hashagg
Tom> costing done in that framework than in what currently exists.

Incidentally, the most obvious obstacle to better planning of grouping
sets in the sorted cases is not so much how to pick paths in
grouping_planner itself, but rather the fact that query_planner wants to
be given only one sort order. Is there any prospect for improvement
there?

--
Andrew (irc:RhodiumToad)