Re: executor relation handling

I wrote:
> Keeping that comparison in mind, I'm inclined to think that 0001
> is the best thing to do for now.  The incremental win from 0002
> is not big enough to justify the API break it creates, while your
> 0005 is not really attacking the problem the right way.

I've pushed 0001 now.  I believe that closes out all the patches
discussed in this thread, so I've marked the CF entry committed.
Thanks for all the hard work!

            regards, tom lane