Greg Smith <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Rob Wultsch wrote: >> At a minimum I assume that if both of the commands were started at >> about the same time they would each scan the table in the same >> direction and whichever creation was slower would benefit from most of >> the table data it needed being prepopulated in shared buffers. Is this >> the case? > This might be optimistic; No, it's not optimistic in the least, at least not since we implemented synchronized seqscans (in 8.3 or thereabouts). regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-performance mailing list (pgsql-performance@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-performance