Обсуждение: Feedback from recent training
* Want option to *never* put double-quotes around object names, even when I use an uppercase character in a name. * Why is Primary Key on different dialog than columns? Want a check box to say that a column is the PK. * Name of a Constraint should default to what Postgres will call it, so that it's clear that a constraint *will* be assigned a name even if we leave it blank (which is best practice to do so). * PKs and Unique constraints should show as Indexes in addition to showing as a Constraint. Unique indexes should show as Constraints. Yes, they're different, slightly, but they're so close it's annoying to have to guess. * When you perform an action, why doesn't it refresh that aspect? * Why are Schema Privs not shown on Grant Wizard for a specific Schema? When we click on a schema it shows only table privs for that schema. Schema privs must be accessed via Properties..Privileges tab, which is non-intuitive. * Want Copy/Paste objects between schemas. * Want "Clone" object, which copies object but prompts for new name. * Want option to make Login Roles appear on priv dialogs, not just Group Roles. * Want to be able to use SERIAL and BIGSERIAL types for columns * Only show Object Type if there is at least one object of that type in that Schema. De-clutters display. We can have a right-click dialog to create a new object, with sub-menu to select object type. * Disabling Rule object type visibility doesn't appear to work!?! * Want to be able to specify ConnectionLimit for users via dialog * If there are >20 (N?) objects, then show that using a breakdown. e.g. A-C, D-G, H-M, N-S, T-V, W-Z. So when we have 100s of objects we can still retain sanity. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Thanks Simon - I've added these to the first page on our new project Wiki at http://code.pgadmin.org/trac/wiki/FeedbackItems. Some notes below as well. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > * Why is Primary Key on different dialog than columns? Want a check box > to say that a column is the PK. There is a planned redesign of the table dialogue that will achieve this. Just need to find the time. > * When you perform an action, why doesn't it refresh that aspect? It should generally. When does it not? > * Why are Schema Privs not shown on Grant Wizard for a specific Schema? > When we click on a schema it shows only table privs for that schema. > Schema privs must be accessed via Properties..Privileges tab, which is > non-intuitive. The wizard is designed to overcome lack of support for GRANT ... ON ALL TO ALL etc. which some other DBMSs have. I think the schema was excluded from the Wizard because it's a single object so doesn't really need the wizard like 20 tables might. I can't say I'm wed to that behaviour though - feel free to submit a patch! > * Want option to make Login Roles appear on priv dialogs, not just Group > Roles. File -> Options -> Preferences -> Show users for privileges > * Want to be able to use SERIAL and BIGSERIAL types for columns You can, though I see they're at the end of the list (probably because it lists types, array types and then the pseudo-types are added). > * Disabling Rule object type visibility doesn't appear to work!?! That option shouldn't be there, as we don't support hiding objects down at that level. Removed. > * Want to be able to specify ConnectionLimit for users via dialog You can, though that may be new in 1.10 iirc. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Le vendredi 24 avril 2009 à 10:47:41, Dave Page a écrit : > [...] > > * Want to be able to use SERIAL and BIGSERIAL types for columns > > You can, though I see they're at the end of the list (probably because > it lists types, array types and then the pseudo-types are added). > Perhaps we should put them on top of the list. Really needed in GTK because you can't type the beginning of the type in the combobox. That's something that would be great to have. > > * Want to be able to specify ConnectionLimit for users via dialog > > You can, though that may be new in 1.10 iirc. > That's right, it's one of the 1.10 new functionalities. -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com
Le vendredi 24 avril 2009 à 09:59:30, Simon Riggs a écrit : > * Want option to *never* put double-quotes around object names, even > when I use an uppercase character in a name. > Seems interesting to me. > [...] > * Want Copy/Paste objects between schemas. > That's something already in my mind. I was also thinking about doing drag and drop between schemas. > * Want "Clone" object, which copies object but prompts for new name. > Could also work with drag and drop, as in an explorer window. > [...] > * If there are >20 (N?) objects, then show that using a breakdown. e.g. > A-C, D-G, H-M, N-S, T-V, W-Z. So when we have 100s of objects we can > still retain sanity. > Interesting too. -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > Le vendredi 24 avril 2009 à 10:47:41, Dave Page a écrit : >> [...] >> > * Want to be able to use SERIAL and BIGSERIAL types for columns >> >> You can, though I see they're at the end of the list (probably because >> it lists types, array types and then the pseudo-types are added). >> > > Perhaps we should put them on top of the list. Really needed in GTK because > you can't type the beginning of the type in the combobox. That's something > that would be great to have. Go ahead :-) -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 15:01 +0200, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > Le vendredi 24 avril 2009 à 10:47:41, Dave Page a écrit : > > [...] > > > * Want to be able to use SERIAL and BIGSERIAL types for columns > > > > You can, though I see they're at the end of the list (probably because > > it lists types, array types and then the pseudo-types are added). > > > > Perhaps we should put them on top of the list. Really needed in GTK because > you can't type the beginning of the type in the combobox. That's something > that would be great to have. Alphabetic seems best, whatever kind of type they are. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 15:04 +0200, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > > [...] > > * Want Copy/Paste objects between schemas. > > > > That's something already in my mind. I was also thinking about doing drag and > drop between schemas. Drag and drop probably should be a Move rather than a Copy action. Some additional ideas from me: We could drag/drop objects onto tablespaces to move them, or onto users to grant them access for users. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
On 4/26/09, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 15:01 +0200, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: >> Le vendredi 24 avril 2009 à 10:47:41, Dave Page a écrit : >> > [...] >> > > * Want to be able to use SERIAL and BIGSERIAL types for columns >> > >> > You can, though I see they're at the end of the list (probably because >> > it lists types, array types and then the pseudo-types are added). >> > >> >> Perhaps we should put them on top of the list. Really needed in GTK >> because >> you can't type the beginning of the type in the combobox. That's something >> >> that would be great to have. > > Alphabetic seems best, whatever kind of type they are. No, because that mixes in the array types which we know causes confusion for some users. We need to alphabetise them with the non-array types, but thats likely to be messy. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Sun, 2009-04-26 at 17:45 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > > Alphabetic seems best, whatever kind of type they are. > > No, because that mixes in the array types which we know causes > confusion for some users. We need to alphabetise them with the > non-array types, but thats likely to be messy. How about an extra radio button for Array/Non-Array? That removes the confusion. The appearance of alpha sort stops people from looking further down the list for other items. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
Le dimanche 26 avril 2009 à 20:31:57, Simon Riggs a écrit : > On Sun, 2009-04-26 at 17:45 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > > > Alphabetic seems best, whatever kind of type they are. > > > > No, because that mixes in the array types which we know causes > > confusion for some users. We need to alphabetise them with the > > non-array types, but thats likely to be messy. > > How about an extra radio button for Array/Non-Array? That removes the > confusion. > > The appearance of alpha sort stops people from looking further down the > list for other items. I think Simon's right on the alphabetic sort. It's much simpler/user friendly. I don't like the extra radio button idea, but what about submenus? something like this: First menu Types Array Types User types "Types" Submenu (all internal types and pseudo-types, sorted alphabetically) "Array Types" Submenu (the same, but array ones, sorted alphabetically) "User Types" Submenu (user tables and user types) -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com
Le dimanche 26 avril 2009 à 18:40:15, Simon Riggs a écrit : > On Fri, 2009-04-24 at 15:04 +0200, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > > > [...] > > > * Want Copy/Paste objects between schemas. > > > > That's something already in my mind. I was also thinking about doing drag > > and drop between schemas. > > Drag and drop probably should be a Move rather than a Copy action. > > Some additional ideas from me: We could drag/drop objects onto > tablespaces to move them, or onto users to grant them access for users. That too, yes. I first thought about schemas because we actually have no way to move schemas with pgAdmin's interface. I once tried to write a patch for this, but ended with a refresh problem on the treeview. -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 2009-04-26 at 17:45 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > >> > Alphabetic seems best, whatever kind of type they are. >> >> No, because that mixes in the array types which we know causes >> confusion for some users. We need to alphabetise them with the >> non-array types, but thats likely to be messy. > > How about an extra radio button for Array/Non-Array? That removes the > confusion. I assume you mean a checkbox? We could have a global option to include array types, defaulting to off. Few-enough people probably use array types that overall it would make the experience nicer. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Sun, 2009-04-26 at 20:03 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > > > On Sun, 2009-04-26 at 17:45 +0100, Dave Page wrote: > > > >> > Alphabetic seems best, whatever kind of type they are. > >> > >> No, because that mixes in the array types which we know causes > >> confusion for some users. We need to alphabetise them with the > >> non-array types, but thats likely to be messy. > > > > How about an extra radio button for Array/Non-Array? That removes the > > confusion. > > I assume you mean a checkbox? We could have a global option to include > array types, defaulting to off. Few-enough people probably use array > types that overall it would make the experience nicer. Well, I meant that you would select two things: * Base Type (List control) e.g. Integer * Array or Not (Radio Button) e.g. Non-Array which would then result in a non-array Integer. So the radio button alters the meaning of the item selected from the list box. I understand what you mean also, which is a check-box to decide whether to include the Array variants in the List or not. Right now I guess I prefer my version, but that's no big surprise. ;-) Whichever we pick, the main thing is to make this List and perhaps *all* similar lists, if any others exist, have just a single alpha-sorted list of items, so that people never get confused about whether items are present or not. -- Simon Riggs www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Training, Services and Support
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 8:54 PM, Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > Well, I meant that you would select two things: > * Base Type (List control) e.g. Integer > * Array or Not (Radio Button) e.g. Non-Array > which would then result in a non-array Integer. So the radio button > alters the meaning of the item selected from the list box. For an UI element where the choices are boolean a radio button is inappropriate - that's what a checkbox is for, e.g. Type [integer ] Array? [x] The radio button should be used to select from distinct options - for example, in a trigger you might use radio buttons for BEFORE UPDATE or AFTER UPDATE. I guess the question though, is whether we would want the option to global or local. I'd probably lean toward global rather than cluttering every dialogue with extra controls - especially as users either know about array types and use them, or don't use them. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com