"If you build something like that before". I think I can add that to the list of famous last words. ;) Please, excuse my sarcasm again. But, tell me what to do

"If you build something like that before". I think I can add that to the list of famous last words. ;) Please, excuse my sarcasm again. But, tell me what to do if I didn't built something like this before? What if I built something like equality saturation engine, pseudoboolean optimization using SAT solver and/or beam search? Will it help me somehow? You estimated code size at 4.5KLOC max. Given that C++ programmer delivers 20-25 debugged lines of code per hour in the long run (IBM's stats), it would take 225 hours of work. Given that PSP/TSP recommends planning for 4 hours-on-task per day, it will take 56 work days. My calculation suggests 2.5 work months to implement all that in the worst case of 4.5KLOC. Even the best case of 2.5KLOC would take a month and a half of work. Yours' proposition is not a week's project. Not at all, you can't squeeze it that much. Query planning is hard. Even if you try your best to avoid it. And we have not even started talking about WHERE, GROUP BY and ORDER BY clauses' optimizations. [1] shows the use of loop nest optimization combined with beam search. SQLite uses translation of joins into loop nests, and it transforms loop nests into a graph, the path in the graph represents a solution. The [1] shows simplified nesting graph that is linear, and in general it will be quadratic to the number of tables. [1] https://www.sqlite.org/queryplanner-ng.html https://www.sqlite.org/queryplanner-ng.html I really like that approach. This is exactly an equality saturation [2] (saturate loop nesting through loop nesting commutativity) with the beam search as a selection phase. [2] https://rosstate.org/publications/eqsat/ https://rosstate.org/publications/eqsat/ I think that equality saturation with beam search is a week long project if you already have built something like that. The difference? It will work for arbitrary jons. Of course I am making fun of your statements. Equality saturation requires quite careful planning and will not work for couple of months, you will keep finding something that fails. Beam search is just as hard. You can encode optimal solution selection problem as a pseudoboolean optimization problem, which is more straightforward than beam search, and [2] shows that Pueblo is no slouch there. This is not to say that query planning is easy when you do it my way. Query planning is hard. NP-hard, actually. Sometimes you can get away with a simpler less general solution, but it will bite you sooner than you expect.