On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 4:40 PM, Marc Mamin <M.Mamin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Chris Ruprecht <chris@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Is there any way that I can build multiple indexes on one table without having to scan the table multiple times? For small tables, that's probably not an issue, but if I have a 500 GB table that I need to create 6 indexes on, I don't want to read that table 6 times. >>> Nothing I could find in the manual other than reindex, but that's not helping, since it only rebuilds indexes that are already there and I don't know if that reads the table once or multiple times. If I could create indexes inactive and then run reindex, which then reads the table once, I would have a solution. But that doesn't seem to exist either. >> >>Just build them with separate but concurrent connections, and the >>scans will be synchronized so it will be only one. >> >>Btw, reindex rebuilds one index at a time, so what I do is issue >>separate reindex for each index in parallel, to avoid the repeated >>scans as well. >> >>Just make sure you've got the I/O and CPU capacity for it (you'll be >>writing many indexes at once, so there is a lot of I/O). > > Index creation on large tables are mostly CPU bound as long as no swap occurs. > I/O may be an issue when all your indexes are similar; e.g. all on single int4 columns. > in other cases the writes will not all take place concurrently. > To reduce I/O due to swap, you can consider increasing maintenance_work_mem on the connextions/sessionns > that build the indexes. Usually there will always be swap, unless you've got toy indexes. But swap I/O is all sequential I/O, with a good readahead setting there should be no problem. It's the final writing step that can be a bottleneck if you have a lame I/O system and try to push 5 or 6 indexes at once.
