Received: from maia.hub.org (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F21C5799314 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:24:21 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 68901-05 for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 20:24:06 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from spinlock.commandprompt.com (host-215.commandprompt.net [207.173.203.215]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 310B47992FD for ; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:24:10 -0300 (ADT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spinlock.commandprompt.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57CB534803A; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:24:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from spinlock.commandprompt.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (spinlock.commandprompt.com.commandprompt.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9RfDEJkaLovk; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:24:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from perhan.alvh.no-ip.org (200-85-214-83.bk4-dsl.surnet.cl [200.85.214.83]) by spinlock.commandprompt.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E9DD0348037; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 13:24:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by perhan.alvh.no-ip.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C8A686E4BF; Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:24:01 -0300 (CLST) Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:24:01 -0300 From: Alvaro Herrera To: Andres Freund Cc: pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, Greg Smith , Rob Wultsch , Tom Lane Subject: Re: Building multiple indexes concurrently Message-ID: <20100317202401.GC3902@alvh.no-ip.org> References: <2c5ef4e31003161804l5e32ceb9v6b7019118f30004d@mail.gmail.com> <2c5ef4e31003170807x3f26dd77v57a1631094bc5270@mail.gmail.com> <4BA12328.4080803@2ndquadrant.com> <201003172024.10538.andres@anarazel.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <201003172024.10538.andres@anarazel.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.559 tagged_above=-10 required=5 tests=AWL=0.040, BAYES_00=-2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201003/212 X-Sequence-Number: 38037 Andres Freund escribió: > I find it way much easier to believe such issues exist on a tables in > constrast to indexes. The likelihood to get sequential accesses on an index is > small enough on a big table to make it unlikely to matter much. Vacuum walks indexes sequentially, for one. -- Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/ PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support