Обсуждение: Some questions on the backup window

hi,

Just before going back to work (OK, I'm already late), I have some questions
regarding the patch I'm currently working on.

I'm working on the backup window. It's already resizable, but components on
the first tab do not resize accordingly. Moreover, there are plenty more
options on this window than what the UI shows.

I already changed the UI so that the resize works. I added two new options
(encoding and compress ratio). All of this is available here:
http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=users/gleu/pgadmin.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/pgdump.
There are five more options interesting to add. But that's too much for one
tab only. I'm thinking about adding a new tab. I'll split the checkboxes in
two different tabs. Any objections on this?

I would also like to add the capacity to choose the objects you want to save.
I mean, right now, a user can save a whole database, a whole schema or one
table. But the same user cannot save two tables on the same file with
pgAdmin's UI. So, I intend to add another new tab, which will show all objects
available in the selected object (all schemas and tables if he selected a
database, all tables if he selected a schema, nothing if he selected a table).
H'll be able to select each object he want with checkboxes. Any opinions on
this? or maybe better ideas, because I'm not really fond of mine.

Last question. Some command line options depend on the version of pg_dump. I
can say that the backup UI will launch the pg_dump we give with the installer,
but we know that some users replace their copy of pg_dump so that they can
dump and restore with older PostgreSQL release. I see two possible solutions.
First one is to launch "pg_dump -V" to know the release of pg_dump. I find it
a bit awkward but it'll certainly work. Second one is to provide a UI to
handle different versions of pg_dump. Way better, but way more work. And
AFAIR, it was already rejected. Before trying to find how to do solution 2 in
a good way, do you have any opinions on which solution is best?

Thanks.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> hi,
>
> Just before going back to work (OK, I'm already late), I have some questions
> regarding the patch I'm currently working on.
>
> I'm working on the backup window. It's already resizable, but components on
> the first tab do not resize accordingly. Moreover, there are plenty more
> options on this window than what the UI shows.

Cool.

> I already changed the UI so that the resize works. I added two new options
> (encoding and compress ratio). All of this is available here:
> http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=users/gleu/pgadmin.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/pgdump.
> There are five more options interesting to add. But that's too much for one
> tab only. I'm thinking about adding a new tab. I'll split the checkboxes in
> two different tabs. Any objections on this?

Nope.

You might also want to think about how we could re-design the
oft-complained about buttons for go/close that change meaning when the
backup completes successfully.

> I would also like to add the capacity to choose the objects you want to save.
> I mean, right now, a user can save a whole database, a whole schema or one
> table. But the same user cannot save two tables on the same file with
> pgAdmin's UI. So, I intend to add another new tab, which will show all objects
> available in the selected object (all schemas and tables if he selected a
> database, all tables if he selected a schema, nothing if he selected a table).
> H'll be able to select each object he want with checkboxes. Any opinions on
> this? or maybe better ideas, because I'm not really fond of mine.

It sounds similar to what we have in the grant wizard. For
consistency, I'd say both lists should look the same, but feel free to
find a nicer presentation for both dialogues if you like (not sure I
can think of one).

> Last question. Some command line options depend on the version of pg_dump. I
> can say that the backup UI will launch the pg_dump we give with the installer,
> but we know that some users replace their copy of pg_dump so that they can
> dump and restore with older PostgreSQL release. I see two possible solutions.
> First one is to launch "pg_dump -V" to know the release of pg_dump. I find it
> a bit awkward but it'll certainly work.

That's really the only way.

> Second one is to provide a UI to
> handle different versions of pg_dump. Way better, but way more work. And
> AFAIR, it was already rejected. Before trying to find how to do solution 2 in
> a good way, do you have any opinions on which solution is best?

It was rejected by me mainly because there was no nice way of handling
it that I could picture - potentially there are nearly 15 different
versions of apps to deal with (8.0 - 8.4 of PG, EDB and GP). In
reality it's a little lower, but still... If you can come up with a
solution, I'd be happy to see it.

We'd need to have a way for us to ship one version, which might be
chosen as the default and used if the user chooses the version
override warning. We'd then need to provide a way for the user to
specify paths for other versions versions/servers that will be used
when they match the server.


--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:

> I did it yesterday. See the screenshot attached.

Nice. Why are the tabs at the bottom though? If that's your code,
rather than your theme, it should be changed to match the rest of the
app.

> I can't use the list from the grant wizard. It seems I will need to create a
> new component to get a treeview with checkbox. And it won't be easy.

The GW lists different object types in a flat list, so you could use
it. If you want a treeview with checkboxes, you could look at what I
did for StackBuilder - for example the AppTreeCtrl in

http://cvs.pgfoundry.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/stackbuilder/wizard/AppSelectionPage.cpp?rev=1.10&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup.
It's pretty simple - we just toggle the node image as the user clicks.


--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Le mercredi 9 décembre 2009 à 14:29:02, Dave Page a écrit :
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> > hi,
> >
> > Just before going back to work (OK, I'm already late), I have some
> > questions regarding the patch I'm currently working on.
> >
> > I'm working on the backup window. It's already resizable, but components
> > on the first tab do not resize accordingly. Moreover, there are plenty
> > more options on this window than what the UI shows.
>
> Cool.
>
> > I already changed the UI so that the resize works. I added two new
> > options (encoding and compress ratio). All of this is available here:
> > http://git.postgresql.org/gitweb?p=users/gleu/pgadmin.git;a=shortlog;h=re
> >fs/heads/pgdump. There are five more options interesting to add. But
> > that's too much for one tab only. I'm thinking about adding a new tab.
> > I'll split the checkboxes in two different tabs. Any objections on this?
>
> Nope.
>

I did it yesterday. See the screenshot attached.

> You might also want to think about how we could re-design the
> oft-complained about buttons for go/close that change meaning when the
> backup completes successfully.
>

Great idead, just added to my TODO list.

> > I would also like to add the capacity to choose the objects you want to
> > save. I mean, right now, a user can save a whole database, a whole schema
> > or one table. But the same user cannot save two tables on the same file
> > with pgAdmin's UI. So, I intend to add another new tab, which will show
> > all objects available in the selected object (all schemas and tables if
> > he selected a database, all tables if he selected a schema, nothing if he
> > selected a table). H'll be able to select each object he want with
> > checkboxes. Any opinions on this? or maybe better ideas, because I'm not
> > really fond of mine.
>
> It sounds similar to what we have in the grant wizard. For
> consistency, I'd say both lists should look the same, but feel free to
> find a nicer presentation for both dialogues if you like (not sure I
> can think of one).

I can't use the list from the grant wizard. It seems I will need to create a
new component to get a treeview with checkbox. And it won't be easy.

> > Last question. Some command line options depend on the version of
> > pg_dump. I can say that the backup UI will launch the pg_dump we give
> > with the installer, but we know that some users replace their copy of
> > pg_dump so that they can dump and restore with older PostgreSQL release.
> > I see two possible solutions. First one is to launch "pg_dump -V" to know
> > the release of pg_dump. I find it a bit awkward but it'll certainly work.
>
> That's really the only way.
>

OK.

> > Second one is to provide a UI to
> > handle different versions of pg_dump. Way better, but way more work. And
> > AFAIR, it was already rejected. Before trying to find how to do solution
> > 2 in a good way, do you have any opinions on which solution is best?
>
> It was rejected by me mainly because there was no nice way of handling
> it that I could picture - potentially there are nearly 15 different
> versions of apps to deal with (8.0 - 8.4 of PG, EDB and GP). In
> reality it's a little lower, but still... If you can come up with a
> solution, I'd be happy to see it.
>

I forgot that we had to deal with EDB and GP ones. So this is not reasonable,
to say the least.

> We'd need to have a way for us to ship one version, which might be
> chosen as the default and used if the user chooses the version
> override warning. We'd then need to provide a way for the user to
> specify paths for other versions versions/servers that will be used
> when they match the server.
>

Yeah, that's another (long term) TODO.

I think I'll send my current patch to have at least this, and keep the other
ideas on my list. Not sure right now but I'm tending this way.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

Le jeudi 10 décembre 2009 à 16:40:32, Dave Page a écrit :
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> > I did it yesterday. See the screenshot attached.
>
> Nice. Why are the tabs at the bottom though? If that's your code,
> rather than your theme, it should be changed to match the rest of the
> app.
>

Well, I didn't change that. It's already like that in 1.10.

> > I can't use the list from the grant wizard. It seems I will need to
> > create a new component to get a treeview with checkbox. And it won't be
> > easy.
>
> The GW lists different object types in a flat list,

It took me a while to understand what GW means :)

> so you could use it.

In my case, a flat list isn't enough. I need to know if all the objects of a
schema are checked, or only a few of them. If it is the former, I can use "-n
schemaname". If it is the latter, I have to use multiple "-t tablename".

> If you want a treeview with checkboxes, you could look at what I
> did for StackBuilder - for example the AppTreeCtrl in
> http://cvs.pgfoundry.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/stackbuilder/wizard/AppSelectio
> nPage.cpp?rev=1.10&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup. It's pretty simple -
>  we just toggle the node image as the user clicks.
>

Didn't know you already did it, in another project. I will get a look at it.
Thanks.

Anyways, I knew the way to do it. My problem is that if I use that way, we'll
have checkbox that doesn't seem right on some platform. Let's say I use a
checkbox picture from Windows. Linux and Mac users will find that weird. I
don't think we'll want to use different pictures and show the one that better
fits the platform. Moreover, themes will break that right away. So I don't
really know what to do here.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:

> In my case, a flat list isn't enough. I need to know if all the objects of a
> schema are checked, or only a few of them. If it is the former, I can use "-n
> schemaname". If it is the latter, I have to use multiple "-t tablename".

Ahh, ok.

> Didn't know you already did it, in another project. I will get a look at it.
> Thanks.
>
> Anyways, I knew the way to do it. My problem is that if I use that way, we'll
> have checkbox that doesn't seem right on some platform. Let's say I use a
> checkbox picture from Windows. Linux and Mac users will find that weird. I
> don't think we'll want to use different pictures and show the one that better
> fits the platform. Moreover, themes will break that right away. So I don't
> really know what to do here.

Well, if you want the treeview, I'm not sure you have much choice,
unless you want to get all native on us (in the GTK/MSW/Cocoa sense)


--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Le jeudi 10 décembre 2009 à 17:12:51, Dave Page a écrit :
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> > In my case, a flat list isn't enough. I need to know if all the objects
> > of a schema are checked, or only a few of them. If it is the former, I
> > can use "-n schemaname". If it is the latter, I have to use multiple "-t
> > tablename".
>
> Ahh, ok.
>
> > Didn't know you already did it, in another project. I will get a look at
> > it. Thanks.
> >
> > Anyways, I knew the way to do it. My problem is that if I use that way,
> > we'll have checkbox that doesn't seem right on some platform. Let's say I
> > use a checkbox picture from Windows. Linux and Mac users will find that
> > weird. I don't think we'll want to use different pictures and show the
> > one that better fits the platform. Moreover, themes will break that right
> > away. So I don't really know what to do here.
>
> Well, if you want the treeview, I'm not sure you have much choice,
> unless you want to get all native on us (in the GTK/MSW/Cocoa sense)
>

Am I the only one to think that a really native multiplatform tool is an
impossible goal to achieve? :)

Anyways, I'll try your way. Thanks for the code.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> Am I the only one to think that a really native multiplatform tool is an
> impossible goal to achieve? :)

QT seems to do a reasonable job these days.

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Le jeudi 10 décembre 2009 à 17:28:22, Dave Page a écrit :
> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> > Am I the only one to think that a really native multiplatform tool is an
> > impossible goal to achieve? :)
>
> QT seems to do a reasonable job these days.
>

Yeah, you're right. But I see two major issues:

1. Qt is owned by a company. We can't be sure of Qt's future.
2. That would be a really hard and huge work to re-code everything to make
   pgAdmin's work on Qt.

To lower #1 issue, I'm much more preoccupied by the lack of enhancements/work
in the new wxWidgets releases.

To lower #2 issue, we'll also have a big work to use wxWidgets 3.0.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> Le jeudi 10 décembre 2009 à 17:28:22, Dave Page a écrit :
>> On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:18 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>>
>> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
>> > Am I the only one to think that a really native multiplatform tool is an
>> > impossible goal to achieve? :)
>>
>> QT seems to do a reasonable job these days.
>>
>
> Yeah, you're right. But I see two major issues:
>
> 1. Qt is owned by a company. We can't be sure of Qt's future.
> 2. That would be a really hard and huge work to re-code everything to make
>   pgAdmin's work on Qt.

I'm not for a moment suggesting that we use QT, just pointing out that
they've solved much of the problem you mentioned.

As an aside, QT is LGPL'd now, so it's future is not really any less
certain that wxWidgets is.


--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Le jeudi 10 décembre 2009 à 17:05:44, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
> Le jeudi 10 décembre 2009 à 16:40:32, Dave Page a écrit :
> > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
> >
> > <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> [...]
> > If you want a treeview with checkboxes, you could look at what I
> > did for StackBuilder - for example the AppTreeCtrl in
> > http://cvs.pgfoundry.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/stackbuilder/wizard/AppSelect
> >io nPage.cpp?rev=1.10&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup. It's pretty
> > simple - we just toggle the node image as the user clicks.
>
> Didn't know you already did it, in another project. I will get a look at
>  it. Thanks.
>

And so did I. I now have a new tab with the list of objects one can save.
You'll find attached a screenshot showing this.

I still have a few questions:

 * Do you have any ideas for a better name on the tabs?
 * Instead of "Database x", "Schema y", or "Table z", I can probably add the
   icon with the checkbox. Not sure if it's really interesting, but it'll help
   me to get ride of a dirty hack to get back the object's name.
 * A user can set schema's restriction on a database. Should a user see (and
   so backup) only the allowed schemas or should the backup bypass this
   specific configuration? (I mean, if he tries to backup the whole database,
   this configuration is already bypassed)

This patch is in the git repository, but still needs some work, for example to
allow the use of some 8.4 specific options. Moreover the schema and table
backup are actually broken. But it will be quite easy to fix. Expect a
complete patch tonight.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:06 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:

> And so did I. I now have a new tab with the list of objects one can save.
> You'll find attached a screenshot showing this.

Cool :-)

> I still have a few questions:
>
>  * Do you have any ideas for a better name on the tabs?

Maybe just 'Objects'? Not sure about the others. I assume every thing
is selected by default? It would probably be good to add a 'Toggle
selections' button, or 'Check all'/'Uncheck All' (or all three)

>  * Instead of "Database x", "Schema y", or "Table z", I can probably add the
>   icon with the checkbox. Not sure if it's really interesting, but it'll help
>   me to get ride of a dirty hack to get back the object's name.

Not sure how well it'll work to have checkboxes and icons, but it'll
probably look nicer. The other option would be to have something like:

Database
- Schemas
  - Foo
  - Bar
    - Tables
      - foo_table
      - bar_table

>  * A user can set schema's restriction on a database. Should a user see (and
>   so backup) only the allowed schemas or should the backup bypass this
>   specific configuration? (I mean, if he tries to backup the whole database,
>   this configuration is already bypassed)

Good question. I don't think there's much we can do about dumping the
whole database, except to warn the user if there's a restriction in
place that will be ignored.

I think we should honour the restriction in the treeview though.

> This patch is in the git repository, but still needs some work, for example to
> allow the use of some 8.4 specific options. Moreover the schema and table
> backup are actually broken. But it will be quite easy to fix. Expect a
> complete patch tonight.

Cool. Couple of other thoughts from the earlier screenshots:

- On Options #1, change the frame title to 'Type of objects'

- On Options #1, change 'Create DB' 'Include CREATE DATABASE
statement', 'Drop DB' to 'Include DROP DATABASE statement' and prefix
the other two Query options with 'Use'. Oh, and the I on Inserts
should be in lower case.

- On Options #2, remove 'Disable' from 'Disable $ quoting' (it's
already in the frame title)

- On Options #2, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION should be in upper case.



--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Le mardi 15 décembre 2009 à 10:21:33, Dave Page a écrit :
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 9:06 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
>
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> > And so did I. I now have a new tab with the list of objects one can save.
> > You'll find attached a screenshot showing this.
>
> Cool :-)
>
> > I still have a few questions:
> >
> >  * Do you have any ideas for a better name on the tabs?
>
> Maybe just 'Objects'?

Done.

> Not sure about the others. I assume every thing
> is selected by default?

Yes.

> It would probably be good to add a 'Toggle
> selections' button, or 'Check all'/'Uncheck All' (or all three)
>

I can add a Checkbox on the Database node. A click on it would act as a "Check
all"/"Uncheck All" items. I don't see the use of a "Toggle selection" button.

> >  * Instead of "Database x", "Schema y", or "Table z", I can probably add
> > the icon with the checkbox. Not sure if it's really interesting, but
> > it'll help me to get ride of a dirty hack to get back the object's name.
>
> Not sure how well it'll work to have checkboxes and icons, but it'll
> probably look nicer.

Well, the icon will be bigger, but I don't think it'll be an issue. I'll try
tonight.

> The other option would be to have something like:
>
> Database
> - Schemas
>   - Foo
>   - Bar
>     - Tables
>       - foo_table
>       - bar_table
>

That's a really great idea. It'll also mimic the object's browser.

> >  * A user can set schema's restriction on a database. Should a user see
> > (and so backup) only the allowed schemas or should the backup bypass this
> > specific configuration? (I mean, if he tries to backup the whole
> > database, this configuration is already bypassed)
>
> Good question. I don't think there's much we can do about dumping the
> whole database, except to warn the user if there's a restriction in
> place that will be ignored.
>
> I think we should honour the restriction in the treeview though.
>

OK.

> > This patch is in the git repository, but still needs some work, for
> > example to allow the use of some 8.4 specific options. Moreover the
> > schema and table backup are actually broken. But it will be quite easy to
> > fix. Expect a complete patch tonight.
>
> Cool. Couple of other thoughts from the earlier screenshots:
>
> - On Options #1, change the frame title to 'Type of objects'
>

Done.

> - On Options #1, change 'Create DB' 'Include CREATE DATABASE
> statement', 'Drop DB' to 'Include DROP DATABASE statement' and prefix
> the other two Query options with 'Use'. Oh, and the I on Inserts
> should be in lower case.
>

Done.

BTW, I think the drop db option is really a drop objects option. It is the
option that add drop statements for all objects before creating them. Or am I
wrong?

> - On Options #2, remove 'Disable' from 'Disable $ quoting' (it's
> already in the frame title)
>

Already done.

> - On Options #2, SET SESSION AUTHORIZATION should be in upper case.
>

Done.

Thanks.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:

> I can add a Checkbox on the Database node. A click on it would act as a "Check
> all"/"Uncheck All" items. I don't see the use of a "Toggle selection" button.

I find them pretty handy when I need to check > 50% of a large number
of items. You can check the ones you don't want, and then toggle.
Depending on the total number of items, and ratio of checked to
un-checked, it can be quite a timesaver.

It's not essential though - your idea will also work nicely.Would you
make toggling of a schema work the same way?



--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Le mardi 15 décembre 2009 à 12:32:37, Dave Page a écrit :
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
>
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> > I can add a Checkbox on the Database node. A click on it would act as a
> > "Check all"/"Uncheck All" items. I don't see the use of a "Toggle
> > selection" button.
>
> I find them pretty handy when I need to check > 50% of a large number
> of items. You can check the ones you don't want, and then toggle.
> Depending on the total number of items, and ratio of checked to
> un-checked, it can be quite a timesaver.
>

OK, will do that. Not sure on the UI. A simple button would be enough?

> It's not essential though - your idea will also work nicely.Would you
> make toggling of a schema work the same way?
>

It already works this way for schemas. You click on a schema checkbox to
select it, and all tables in this schema are selected too. You click once
again and all tables are de-selected.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> Le mardi 15 décembre 2009 à 12:32:37, Dave Page a écrit :
>> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
>>
>> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
>> > I can add a Checkbox on the Database node. A click on it would act as a
>> > "Check all"/"Uncheck All" items. I don't see the use of a "Toggle
>> > selection" button.
>>
>> I find them pretty handy when I need to check > 50% of a large number
>> of items. You can check the ones you don't want, and then toggle.
>> Depending on the total number of items, and ratio of checked to
>> un-checked, it can be quite a timesaver.
>>
>
> OK, will do that. Not sure on the UI. A simple button would be enough?

Yeah, but lets see how it works with the checkboxes only first.


--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Le mardi 15 décembre 2009 à 13:01:01, Dave Page a écrit :
> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
>
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> > Le mardi 15 décembre 2009 à 12:32:37, Dave Page a écrit :
> >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
> >>
> >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> >> > I can add a Checkbox on the Database node. A click on it would act as
> >> > a "Check all"/"Uncheck All" items. I don't see the use of a "Toggle
> >> > selection" button.
> >>
> >> I find them pretty handy when I need to check > 50% of a large number
> >> of items. You can check the ones you don't want, and then toggle.
> >> Depending on the total number of items, and ratio of checked to
> >> un-checked, it can be quite a timesaver.
> >
> > OK, will do that. Not sure on the UI. A simple button would be enough?
>
> Yeah, but lets see how it works with the checkboxes only first.
>

Tonight's work:
 * Change some strings according to Dave's advice.
 * Add checkbox on the Database node.
 * Honour the schema restriction in the treeview.
 * Re-accept schema only and table only dump.
 * Enable/Disable options depending on pg_dump release.

I tried the whole new layout (Database / Schemas / each schema / Tables /each
table), but it doesn't feel right. I think the old layout with the new
checkbox on the Database node is much better.

TODO:
 * Only the click on the checkbox should change the state of the object
 * Use icons with the checkbox?
 * Toggle Selection button?
 * Check the UI on Mac and Windows.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

Le mercredi 16 décembre 2009 à 00:19:38, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
> Le mardi 15 décembre 2009 à 13:01:01, Dave Page a écrit :
> > On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 11:59 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
> >
> > <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> > > Le mardi 15 décembre 2009 à 12:32:37, Dave Page a écrit :
> > >> On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 10:34 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
> > >>
> > >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> > >> > I can add a Checkbox on the Database node. A click on it would act
> > >> > as a "Check all"/"Uncheck All" items. I don't see the use of a
> > >> > "Toggle selection" button.
> > >>
> > >> I find them pretty handy when I need to check > 50% of a large number
> > >> of items. You can check the ones you don't want, and then toggle.
> > >> Depending on the total number of items, and ratio of checked to
> > >> un-checked, it can be quite a timesaver.
> > >
> > > OK, will do that. Not sure on the UI. A simple button would be enough?
> >
> > Yeah, but lets see how it works with the checkboxes only first.
>
> Tonight's work:
>  * Change some strings according to Dave's advice.
>  * Add checkbox on the Database node.
>  * Honour the schema restriction in the treeview.
>  * Re-accept schema only and table only dump.
>  * Enable/Disable options depending on pg_dump release.
>
> I tried the whole new layout (Database / Schemas / each schema / Tables
>  /each table), but it doesn't feel right. I think the old layout with the
>  new checkbox on the Database node is much better.
>
> TODO:
>  * Only the click on the checkbox should change the state of the objects

This is now fixed. I also fixed two tiny issues (bigger window and first tab
selected at startup).

>  * Use icons with the checkbox?
>  * Toggle Selection button?

Not sure we need to do this right now. I can probably commit a first patch
with the most important code, and, if all find it better to have those two,
write a second patch.

>  * Check the UI on Mac and Windows.
>

I'll do that tonight.

My next patch will be on the restore dialog.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

Le mercredi 16 décembre 2009 à 13:26:00, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
> Le mercredi 16 décembre 2009 à 00:19:38, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
> [...]
> >  * Check the UI on Mac and Windows.
>
> I'll do that tonight.
>

Done. Works great on both.

Any tests or comments before I apply it? (patch attached)


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> Le mercredi 16 décembre 2009 à 13:26:00, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
>> Le mercredi 16 décembre 2009 à 00:19:38, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
>> [...]
>> >  * Check the UI on Mac and Windows.
>>
>> I'll do that tonight.
>>
>
> Done. Works great on both.
>
> Any tests or comments before I apply it? (patch attached)

Go ahead - I don't have spare cycles to look now, but I'm sure the
code is up to your normal standard.

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com

Le jeudi 17 décembre 2009 à 09:34:04, Dave Page a écrit :
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> > Le mercredi 16 décembre 2009 à 13:26:00, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
> >> Le mercredi 16 décembre 2009 à 00:19:38, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> >  * Check the UI on Mac and Windows.
> >>
> >> I'll do that tonight.
> >
> > Done. Works great on both.
> >
> > Any tests or comments before I apply it? (patch attached)
>
> Go ahead - I don't have spare cycles to look now, but I'm sure the
> code is up to your normal standard.
>

Done. Thanks.

Now, the Restore window.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 10:16 PM, yasirhantoush
<yasirhantoush@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Guys,
> Would you please unsubscribe me from this mailing list?
> My email is yasirhantoush@hotmail.com
>

http://www.pgadmin.org/development/list.php explains how to unsubscribe.

Regards, Dave.

Hello Guys,
Would you please unsubscribe me from this mailing list?
My email is yasirhantoush@hotmail.com

-----Original Message-----
From: pgadmin-hackers-owner@postgresql.org
[mailto:pgadmin-hackers-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Guillaume Lelarge
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2009 8:33 PM
To: pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: Dave Page
Subject: Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Some questions on the backup window

Le jeudi 17 décembre 2009 à 09:34:04, Dave Page a écrit :
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:44 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>
> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote:
> > Le mercredi 16 décembre 2009 à 13:26:00, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
> >> Le mercredi 16 décembre 2009 à 00:19:38, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit :
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> >  * Check the UI on Mac and Windows.
> >>
> >> I'll do that tonight.
> >
> > Done. Works great on both.
> >
> > Any tests or comments before I apply it? (patch attached)
>
> Go ahead - I don't have spare cycles to look now, but I'm sure the
> code is up to your normal standard.
>

Done. Thanks.

Now, the Restore window.


--
Guillaume.
 http://www.postgresqlfr.org
 http://dalibo.com

--
Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers