flatten unions #17868
Draft
flatten unions #17868
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
🤖 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Which issue does this PR close?
Related to XXX
Running benchmarks to see if this helps
Rationale for this change
I spent time profiling the sql_planner benchmarks as part of #17419
and the amount of time spent planning unions was surprising.
What changes are included in this PR?
Are these changes tested?
I also felt bad we haven't really improved planning speed in a while!
I couldn't help myself and implemented a simple optimization to flatten unions
as soon as possible in the planner rather than waiting maybe for the optimizers to do it.
The basic idea is quite simple: if the input is a union, just add its inputs to the list of inputs
Are there any user-facing changes?
not sure