We could do something like set some bool flag in PlannerInfo to tell the planner not to bother adding the final LimitPath as we've already added another which does the job, but is it really worth adding that complexity for this patch? You already mentioned that "this patch is very straightforward". I don't think it would be if we added code to avoid the LimitPath duplication.
Yeah, maybe this is the right way to do it. I agree that this would complicate the code. Not sure if it's worth doing.
