Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Packages, Repository and Rebuilding

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "'Jean-Michel POURE'" <jmpoure(at)axitrad(dot)com>, pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Packages, Repository and Rebuilding
Date: 2001-09-20 13:53:12
Message-ID: 8568FC767B4AD311AC33006097BCD3D61A2E70@woody.vale-housing.co.uk (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-hackers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jean-Michel POURE [mailto:jmpoure(at)axitrad(dot)com] 
> Sent: 20 September 2001 14:20
> To: pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: [pgadmin-hackers] Packages, Repository and Rebuilding
> 
> 
> Hello Dave and all,
> 
> I know we discussed about it already, so drop this mail for 
> the moment if 
> you don't have time.
> 
> I would like to work on packages, repository and rebuilding 
> features in 
> pgAdmin 2.
> Simply because I have to manage several databases and it 
> becomes more and more difficult to move code from one 
> database to another.
> 
> PostgreSQL core team wron't implement these features before a 
> long time, I 
> need them now.
> Do you have any spec ? Are you working on these features ?

Version control should be built in from the ground up imo.
Lifted from another email I wrote:

Some thoughts I had;

- vc should be enabled per database
- all appropriate pgXxx classes in pgSchema should have a Versions
collection. This will be a collection of basically the same class, but
without add/drop/edit methods, writable properties or another Versions
collection.
- vc should be implemented in pgSchema, which should autodetect if it's
enabled. Rollback methods must be included.
- data storage should be in the db, in the *minimum* no. of tables possible
which pgSchema must maintain/upgrade/self repair. All object versions should
include uid, timestamp & version no. as well as *all* properties of the
object.


> We need to define the Schema tables of the repository server 
> (pgadmin_dev_* 
> -> pgschema_blabla).

Yes, as I said above, this should be kept to the absolute bare minimum of
tables. I don't want the vast array of SSOs we had with that last version
(many people didn't like them).

One thing that did cross my mind the other day - all that messing about
figuring out dependencies that we (mainly you) worked on was somewhat
unnecessary - just do everything in oid order and everything should be OK!

> I wron't be able to start before one or two weeks, then I plan to 
> concentrate on these features.

OK.

> As usual, I don't want to start something before we agree on 
> everything. I will not upload code to CVS at the beginning to 
> avoid breaking things.

OK. I think this should be done on a branch (once we figure out how to do
that!). That way, I can continue with the base release.

> What's on your agenda my friend?

- Migration Wizard (currently banging my head against a brick wall).
- Reverse Engineering Wizard (write full SQL scripts/publish databases to
other datasources).

To be honest though, both Mark & I are have done so much programming
recently that neither of us have much enthusiasm right now and just can't
get started on anything. Quite frankly I just want to go down the pub and
get pi**ed.

Give it a couple of weeks and that should pass though :-)

/Dave.

pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Dave PageDate: 2001-09-20 14:51:08
Subject: Re: Packages, Repository and Rebuilding
Previous:From: Jean-Michel POUREDate: 2001-09-20 13:20:14
Subject: Packages, Repository and Rebuilding

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group