Fix a couple of planner bugs introduced by the new ability to discard

ORDER BY <constant> as redundant.  One is that this means query_planner()
has to canonicalize pathkeys even when the query jointree is empty;
the canonicalization was always a no-op in such cases before, but no more.
Also, we have to guard against thinking that a set-returning function is
"constant" for this purpose.  Add a couple of regression tests for these
evidently under-tested cases.  Per report from Greg Stark and subsequent
experimentation.

src/backend/optimizer/path/equivclass.c

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
  * Portions Copyright (c) 1994, Regents of the University of California
  *
  * IDENTIFICATION
- *	  $PostgreSQL: pgsql/src/backend/optimizer/path/equivclass.c,v 1.2 2007/01/22 20:00:39 tgl Exp $
+ *	  $PostgreSQL: pgsql/src/backend/optimizer/path/equivclass.c,v 1.3 2007/07/07 20:46:45 tgl Exp $
  *
  *-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  */
@@ -328,8 +328,8 @@ add_eq_member(EquivalenceClass *ec, Expr *expr, Relids relids,
 		/*
 		 * No Vars, assume it's a pseudoconstant.  This is correct for
 		 * entries generated from process_equivalence(), because a WHERE
-		 * clause can't contain aggregates and non-volatility was checked
-		 * before process_equivalence() ever got called.  But
+		 * clause can't contain aggregates or SRFs, and non-volatility was
+		 * checked before process_equivalence() ever got called.  But
 		 * get_eclass_for_sort_expr() has to work harder.  We put the tests
 		 * there not here to save cycles in the equivalence case.
 		 */
@@ -428,13 +428,15 @@ get_eclass_for_sort_expr(PlannerInfo *root,
 						  false, expr_datatype);
 
 	/*
-	 * add_eq_member doesn't check for volatile functions or aggregates,
-	 * but such could appear in sort expressions, so we have to check
-	 * whether its const-marking was correct.
+	 * add_eq_member doesn't check for volatile functions, set-returning
+	 * functions, or aggregates, but such could appear in sort expressions;
+	 * so we have to check whether its const-marking was correct.
 	 */
 	if (newec->ec_has_const)
 	{
-		if (newec->ec_has_volatile || contain_agg_clause((Node *) expr))
+		if (newec->ec_has_volatile ||
+			expression_returns_set((Node *) expr) ||
+			contain_agg_clause((Node *) expr))
 		{
 			newec->ec_has_const = false;
 			newem->em_is_const = false;

src/backend/optimizer/plan/planmain.c

@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
  *
  *
  * IDENTIFICATION
- *	  $PostgreSQL: pgsql/src/backend/optimizer/plan/planmain.c,v 1.101 2007/05/04 01:13:44 tgl Exp $
+ *	  $PostgreSQL: pgsql/src/backend/optimizer/plan/planmain.c,v 1.102 2007/07/07 20:46:45 tgl Exp $
  *
  *-------------------------------------------------------------------------
  */
@@ -106,9 +106,21 @@ query_planner(PlannerInfo *root, List *tlist,
 	 */
 	if (parse->jointree->fromlist == NIL)
 	{
+		/* We need a trivial path result */
 		*cheapest_path = (Path *)
 			create_result_path((List *) parse->jointree->quals);
 		*sorted_path = NULL;
+		/*
+		 * We still are required to canonicalize any pathkeys, in case
+		 * it's something like "SELECT 2+2 ORDER BY 1".
+		 */
+		root->canon_pathkeys = NIL;
+		root->query_pathkeys = canonicalize_pathkeys(root,
+													 root->query_pathkeys);
+		root->group_pathkeys = canonicalize_pathkeys(root,
+													 root->group_pathkeys);
+		root->sort_pathkeys = canonicalize_pathkeys(root,
+													root->sort_pathkeys);
 		return;
 	}
 

src/test/regress/expected/select.out

@@ -736,3 +736,35 @@ SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 DESC NULLS LAST;
    
 (7 rows)
 
+--
+-- Test some corner cases that have been known to confuse the planner
+--
+-- ORDER BY on a constant doesn't really need any sorting
+SELECT 1 AS x ORDER BY x;
+ x 
+---
+ 1
+(1 row)
+
+-- But ORDER BY on a set-valued expression does
+create function sillysrf(int) returns setof int as
+  'values (1),(10),(2),($1)' language sql immutable;
+select sillysrf(42);
+ sillysrf 
+----------
+        1
+       10
+        2
+       42
+(4 rows)
+
+select sillysrf(-1) order by 1;
+ sillysrf 
+----------
+       -1
+        1
+        2
+       10
+(4 rows)
+
+drop function sillysrf(int);

src/test/regress/sql/select.sql

@@ -186,3 +186,19 @@ SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1;
 SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 NULLS FIRST;
 SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 DESC;
 SELECT * FROM foo ORDER BY f1 DESC NULLS LAST;
+
+--
+-- Test some corner cases that have been known to confuse the planner
+--
+
+-- ORDER BY on a constant doesn't really need any sorting
+SELECT 1 AS x ORDER BY x;
+
+-- But ORDER BY on a set-valued expression does
+create function sillysrf(int) returns setof int as
+  'values (1),(10),(2),($1)' language sql immutable;
+
+select sillysrf(42);
+select sillysrf(-1) order by 1;
+
+drop function sillysrf(int);