"Zeugswetter Andreas DCP SD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > My answer to this would be to (have an option to) ommit this relpages > and reltuples update.
Wouldn't help, unless you want to get rid of relhasindex too. > Wes, you could most likely solve your immediate problem if you did an > analyze before creating the indexes. No, because that would install an approximate tuple count that the first CREATE INDEX would (most likely) still want to replace. The best I can gather from Wes' mail is that he's somehow getting a higher-than-chance probability that the first two CREATE INDEX commands finish at almost exactly the same time, and thus neither one of them sees the pg_class row as already updated with the correct values. I can't think of any effect in the PG code that would make CREATE INDEX commands tend to converge rather than diverge, so maybe there is some external effect here. Wes, is your machine a dual processor by any chance? Which OS X version exactly? regards, tom lane ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster