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

Re: Email notification pgAgent

From: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
To: Jasmin Dizdarevic <jasmin(dot)dizdarevic(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Email notification pgAgent
Date: 2010-12-31 09:26:22
Message-ID: AANLkTinoVc7=RFaUwaNUjShwbbaLXnmy5MojEcPH0k5i@mail.gmail.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgadmin-hackers
On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 7:30 PM, Jasmin Dizdarevic
<jasmin(dot)dizdarevic(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> I'm not so keen on that - it could require some funky code to ensure
> that the user uses sequential (or at least, non-duplicate) numbers
> across all steps and would be a pain to upgrade to. Plus, there is
> precedence for using alpha ordering - that's how triggers work
>> I don't think that we must ensure that no duplicate values are used. With
>> changing the "order by jstname,jstid" clause to "order by
>> jstorder,jstname,jstid" we would have a fall back on alpha ordering.
>> Steps with "jstorder" = null would be executed last - so there is no need to
>> upgrade. To give the user feedback about ordering in pgadmin, the steps
>> could be ordered the same way in tree view and steps tab in job properties
>> dialog. We could also add the jstorder-column to the list view.

What do others think? I'm still not convinced this is necessary - and
it certainly will become inconsistent with triggers.

-- 
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2010-12-31 09:52:14
Subject: Re: Trac tickets
Previous:From: Dave PageDate: 2010-12-31 01:39:31
Subject: Re: Source reindenting

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