Hi Richard Guo Is it necessary to add some comments here?
+ if (!innerpath->parallel_safe || + !bms_is_empty(PATH_REQ_OUTER(innerpath))) + continue; + + if (matched_path != NULL && + compare_path_costs(matched_path, innerpath, TOTAL_COST) <= 0) + continue; + + matched_path = innerpath; Richard Guo <guofengli...@gmail.com> 于2024年1月10日周三 15:08写道: > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 11:43 AM Andy Fan <zhihui.fan1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Tue, Apr 11, 2023 at 11:03 AM Richard Guo <guofengli...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> As the comment above add_path() says, 'The pathlist is kept sorted by >>> total_cost, with cheaper paths at the front.' And it seems that >>> get_cheapest_parallel_safe_total_inner() relies on this ordering >>> (without being mentioned in the comments, which I think we should do). >>> >> >> I think the answer for ${subject} should be yes. Per the comments in >> add_partial_path, we have >> >> * add_partial_path >> * >> * As in add_path, the partial_pathlist is kept sorted with the cheapest >> * total path in front. This is depended on by multiple places, which >> * just take the front entry as the cheapest path without searching. >> * >> > > I'm not sure about this conclusion. Surely we can depend on that the > partial_pathlist is kept sorted by total_cost ASC. This is emphasized > in the comment of add_partial_path, and also leveraged in practice, such > as in many places we just use linitial(rel->partial_pathlist) as the > cheapest partial path. > > But get_cheapest_parallel_safe_total_inner works on pathlist not > partial_pathlist. And for pathlist, I'm not sure if it's a good > practice to depend on its ordering. Because > > 1) the comment of add_path only mentions that add_path_precheck relies > on this ordering, but it does not mention that other functions also do; > > 2) other than add_path_precheck, I haven't observed any other functions > that rely on this ordering. The only exception as far as I notice is > get_cheapest_parallel_safe_total_inner. > > On the other hand, if we declare that we can rely on the pathlist being > sorted in ascending order by total_cost, we should update the comment > for add_path to highlight this aspect. We should also include a comment > for get_cheapest_parallel_safe_total_inner to clarify why an early exit > is possible, similar to what we do for add_path_precheck. Additionally, > in several places, we can optimize our code by taking advantage of this > fact and terminate the iteration through the pathlist early when looking > for the cheapest path of a certain kind. > > Thanks > Richard >