Обсуждение: Refresh timer in status window very unintuitive
From what I can tell, the refresh timer in the status window is configured independently for each pane. But since we are now showing all panes at the same time, that's *extremely* un-untuitive. If we want to keep a timer-per-pane, we should make it more clear that the rate is for only that. Otherwise, we should make it a single refresh rate... -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
Le 16/02/2010 13:47, Magnus Hagander a écrit : > From what I can tell, the refresh timer in the status window is > configured independently for each pane. You're right. > But since we are now showing all panes at the same time, that's > *extremely* un-untuitive. Yes. > If we > want to keep a timer-per-pane, we should make it more clear that the > rate is for only that. Otherwise, we should make it a single refresh > rate... > The server status patch for previous release had quite some changes, so I'm not sure that four timers are still essential. Anyways, we can still have four different timers and only one refresh rate. Dave, do you remember why you think four timers are essential? -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 23:17, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > Le 16/02/2010 13:47, Magnus Hagander a écrit : >> From what I can tell, the refresh timer in the status window is >> configured independently for each pane. > > You're right. > >> But since we are now showing all panes at the same time, that's >> *extremely* un-untuitive. > > Yes. > >> If we >> want to keep a timer-per-pane, we should make it more clear that the >> rate is for only that. Otherwise, we should make it a single refresh >> rate... >> > > The server status patch for previous release had quite some changes, so > I'm not sure that four timers are still essential. Anyways, we can still > have four different timers and only one refresh rate. > > Dave, do you remember why you think four timers are essential? There's certainly a point in not refreshing the server log all the time, especially if it's large, as has been mentioned recently on the lists :-) I also notice that we always refresh the list of which files are in the log file directory all the time... In the case of my client, they had almost 1,000 files in there. Yes, they should rotate more often, but do we really need to reload that whole list all the time? ;) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: > The server status patch for previous release had quite some changes, so > I'm not sure that four timers are still essential. Anyways, we can still > have four different timers and only one refresh rate. > > Dave, do you remember why you think four timers are essential? Because refreshing some panes is much more expensive than others. If you can come up with a better UI design, feel free, but I don't want to lose the ability to have different refresh rates for each pane. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
Le 17/02/2010 10:25, Dave Page a écrit : > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> The server status patch for previous release had quite some changes, so >> I'm not sure that four timers are still essential. Anyways, we can still >> have four different timers and only one refresh rate. >> >> Dave, do you remember why you think four timers are essential? > > Because refreshing some panes is much more expensive than others. If > you can come up with a better UI design, feel free, but I don't want > to lose the ability to have different refresh rates for each pane. > Actually, I don't have any better ideas on the UI... :-/ -- Guillaume. http://www.postgresqlfr.org http://dalibo.com
2010/2/17 Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>: > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Guillaume Lelarge > <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >> The server status patch for previous release had quite some changes, so >> I'm not sure that four timers are still essential. Anyways, we can still >> have four different timers and only one refresh rate. >> >> Dave, do you remember why you think four timers are essential? > > Because refreshing some panes is much more expensive than others. If > you can come up with a better UI design, feel free, but I don't want > to lose the ability to have different refresh rates for each pane. Do we actually need different ones for each pane though, or do we just need one for the log and one for the rest? (That might open up more options for how to make such an UI..) -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 11:27 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> wrote: > 2010/2/17 Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>: >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Guillaume Lelarge >> <guillaume@lelarge.info> wrote: >>> The server status patch for previous release had quite some changes, so >>> I'm not sure that four timers are still essential. Anyways, we can still >>> have four different timers and only one refresh rate. >>> >>> Dave, do you remember why you think four timers are essential? >> >> Because refreshing some panes is much more expensive than others. If >> you can come up with a better UI design, feel free, but I don't want >> to lose the ability to have different refresh rates for each pane. > > Do we actually need different ones for each pane though, or do we just > need one for the log and one for the rest? (That might open up more > options for how to make such an UI..) Thats a possibility. -- Dave Page EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com