Re: Properly pathify the union planner

On Thu, 15 Feb 2024 at 17:30, David Rowley <dgrowleyml(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 at 22:05, Richard Guo <guofenglinux(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > I'm thinking that maybe it'd be better to move the work of sorting the
> > subquery's paths to the outer query level, specifically within the
> > build_setop_child_paths() function, just before we stick SubqueryScanPath
> > on top of the subquery's paths. I think this is better because:
> >
> > 1. This minimizes the impact on subquery planning and reduces the
> > footprint within the grouping_planner() function as much as possible.
> >
> > 2. This can help avoid the aforementioned add_path() issue because the
> > two involved paths will be structured as:
>
> Yes, this is a good idea. I agree with both of your points.

> v2 attached.

If anyone else or if you want to take another look, let me know soon.
Otherwise, I'll assume that's the reviews over and I can take another
look again.

If nobody speaks up before Monday next week (11th), New Zealand time,
I'm going to be looking at this again from the point of view of
committing it.

Thanks

David