| From: | Bertrand Drouvot <bertranddrouvot(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuya Kawata <kawatatatsuya0913(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] doc: clarify pg_stat_lock.fastpath_exceeded scope |
| Date: | 2026-06-22 05:05:20 |
| Message-ID: | ajjCkF0cTA2DnSbx@bdtpg |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi Kawata-san,
On Sat, Jun 20, 2026 at 06:14:59PM +0900, Tatsuya Kawata wrote:
> Hi Bertrand-san, Michael-san,
>
> Thanks for the feedback. Centralizing the explanation and linking
> from views makes sense, so v2 takes that approach.
Thanks for the new version.
--- a/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml
+++ b/doc/src/sgml/mvcc.sgml
@@ -1248,6 +1248,35 @@ ERROR: could not serialize access due to read/write dependencies among transact
</tbody>
</tgroup>
</table>
+
+ <sect3 id="locking-tables-fast-path">
+ <title>Fast-Path Locking</title>
The location looks ok to me.
+ for eligible locks, fast-path is used only when a per-backend slot is
+ available;
Should we add a description of the consequences of not being able to acquire the
lock in fast-path (when there are no available slots)? For example, we could
say that this is considerably more expensive and may be subject to contention.
Regards,
--
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | solai v | 2026-06-22 05:14:09 | Re: [PATCH] Add support for INSERT ... SET syntax |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2026-06-22 04:38:39 | Re: Improve UNION's output rowcount estimate |