Re: Remove some redundant set_cheapest() calls

Richard Guo <guofenglinux@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 27, 2024 at 4:06 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I'm less convinced about changing this.  I'd rather keep it consistent
>> with mark_dummy_rel.

> Hm, I wonder if we should revise the comment there that states "but not
> when called from elsewhere", as it does not seem to be true.

I'd be okay with wording like "This is redundant in current usage
because set_rel_pathlist will do it later, but it's cheap so we keep
it for consistency with mark_dummy_rel".  What do you think?

            regards, tom lane