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

Re: 1.8.4 bug DB Restriction field

From: Zach Conrad <zach(dot)conrad(at)digitecinc(dot)com>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
Cc: pgadmin-support(at)postgresql(dot)org, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>
Subject: Re: 1.8.4 bug DB Restriction field
Date: 2008-06-06 14:47:44
Message-ID: 13161761.18571212763664212.JavaMail.root@zimbra (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgadmin-support
Dave, Guillaume,

What I have grown accustomed to has been the ability to limit the connection to a particular db or db's instead of seeing all the databases I don't need to work with on that connection. I would be in favor of dropping the NOT. 

Perhaps this is an UI issue where the DB Restriction field is trying to do too much. Maybe there could be two fields:
1. Listed Databases (comma separated list of database names)
2. Filters (uses namespaces for filtering)

I could see Filters as a separate tab (Properties | Filters | SQL) for the connection properties, similar to how a table properties tabs work, specifically the Column tab where you could have the Add button add a new filter. If someone really wants that much control over the connection, they can have it. Generally speaking, the Listed Databases field is a Filter, but less confusing to general users.


Zach Conrad

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
To: "Guillaume Lelarge" <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>
Cc: "Zach Conrad" <zach(dot)conrad(at)digitecinc(dot)com>, pgadmin-support(at)postgresql(dot)org
Sent: Friday, June 6, 2008 9:26:57 AM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: Re: [pgadmin-support] 1.8.4 bug DB Restriction field

On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 3:22 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
<guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:

>>> Dave, what do you think I should do ? remove the patch ?
>> Just remove the NOT?
> I can do this. But, for example, if someone was using this filter field to
> get out template databases, removing the NOT won't fix this.

Hmm, good point. The original intent behind the feature was for
teaching environments in which there may be one database for each
student, so the students could limit their list to just their own
database without seeing all their schoolmates as well. I think that's
probably the most important case to fix (which removing the NOT should
do), as those people will likely have *lot's* of clutter otherwise.

Alternatively, you could make the NOT optional with a checkbox.

Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK:

In response to

pgadmin-support by date

Next:From: Dave PageDate: 2008-06-06 15:01:43
Subject: Re: HELP
Previous:From: Dave PageDate: 2008-06-06 14:26:57
Subject: Re: 1.8.4 bug DB Restriction field

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group