Handling conflicting information is an important challenge in AI. Measuring inconsistency is an approach that provides ways to quantify the severity of inconsistency and helps understanding the primary sources of conflicts. In particular, a relative inconsistency measure computes, by some criteria, the proportion of the knowledge base that is inconsistent. In this paper we investigate relative inconsistency measures for indefinite databases, which allow for indefinite or partial information which is formally expressed by means of disjunctive tuples. We introduce a postulate-based definition of relative inconsistency measure for indefinite databases with denial constraints, and investigate the compliance of some relative inconsistency measures with rationality postulates for indefinite databases as well as for the special case of definite databases. Finally, we investigate the complexity of the problem of computing the value of the proposed relative inconsistency measures as well as of the problems of deciding whether the inconsistency value is lower than, greater than, or equal to a given threshold for indefinite and definite databases.