Hello @ivantodorovich, I've updated your work to avoid storing the new field, as I didn't believe it was worth storing (and would have been a performance issue to compute on all existing templates on existing databases upgrades).
Searches on those related fields don't need the field to be stored either, do you remember why you had to store it ?
Was it for the queries on product.template where a related field was used in the order by clause ? (I removed some in the pos)

Hello @Feyensv , thanks for taking over!

I stored it because then it'd make the related single variant fields groupable/aggregatable/sortable, behave almost like real fields, which I think it's nice

• Related no-store fields becomes groupable/aggregable/sortable #127353

That PR is what actually inspired this. I wanted to leverage this improvement here.
That's the story, but I'm not against not storing it, though.

Alternatively, with perf in mind, maybe the compute method could be refactored by using a single raw SQL query instead.