Re: WIP: Upper planner pathification

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Agreed -- we need this in tree as soon as realistically possible.

> There is a a bit a problem here, because this patch conflicts heavily
> with at least one other patch that's been in the queue for a long time,
> which is Kommi/Rowley's patch for parallel aggregation; the more we
> delay applying this one, the worse the deadlines for that one.

> I assume they are hard at work updating that patch to apply on top of
> Tom's patch. It's not realistic to expect that we would apply any
> further planner changes before this one is in.

I don't think it's quite that bad: the patch doesn't touch scan/join
planning very much, so for instance I doubt that the pending unique-joins
patch is completely broken. But yeah, anything having anything to do
with planning of grouping/aggregation or later stages is going to need
major revision to play with this.

regards, tom lane