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

Re: [pgadmin-support] Reconnection problem.

From: Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info>
To: Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
Cc: PgAdmin Support <pgadmin-support(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgadmin-hackers <pgadmin-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Piotr Czekalski <pczekalski(at)techbaza(dot)pl>
Subject: Re: [pgadmin-support] Reconnection problem.
Date: 2011-05-03 20:45:39
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgadmin-hackerspgadmin-support
On 05/03/2011 12:17 PM, Dave Page wrote:
> On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Guillaume Lelarge
> <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>> On 05/03/2011 11:09 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>>> On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 10:37 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>>> <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>>>> On 05/02/2011 10:09 PM, Guillaume Lelarge wrote:
>>>>> On 05/02/2011 10:20 AM, Dave Page wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, May 1, 2011 at 4:32 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
>>>>>> <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> On 04/26/2011 12:46 PM, Piotr Czekalski wrote:
>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>> I'd would appreciate such feature, because working over GSM modem, which
>>>>>>>> is common to the administrators novadays (I think) is a nightmare ;-).
>>>>>>> Got a patch that works. See the attachment. If the query fails, it
>>>>>>> checks if it's because of a bad connection. If connection is bad, it
>>>>>>> resets it, and executes once again the query. If it still fails, you
>>>>>>> have the usual error message. If it succeeds, you won't even notice that
>>>>>>> it had to reset the connection.
>>>>>>> I don't see any issue with this patch, but would like others to get a
>>>>>>> look. It's wxThread and that kind of stuff is not really my thing
>>>>>>> (threading... eeks).
>>>>>>> And one more question, we're really early in beta stage. Usually, it
>>>>>>> would have to wait a few months to get commited in next dev cycle. But
>>>>>>> it is so early in this stage (actually, beta 1 is not even announced
>>>>>>> yet), and it would be a so much welcomed patch that I think it could be
>>>>>>> commited for this release (ie, 1.14).
>>>>>>> Any opinions, objections, ideas?
>>>>>> You cannot just reconnect silently in a patch like this - the user may
>>>>>> have created temp tables or otherwise modified the connection-specific
>>>>>> environment before the connection was lost. Blindly reconnecting and
>>>>>> then executing the query could have disastrous effects.
>>>>> Indeed, you're right. I knew I forgot something important with this patch :)
>>>>> Too bad, because I really liked the silent reconnection. Well, I suppose
>>>>> I'll have to change this to make it verbose.
>>>> Something more like this, then?
>>> That doesn't look entirely objectionable :-p
>>> Couple of wording tweaks though - first, why not reuse the existing
>>> reconnection messages:
>>> wxMessageDialog dlg(this, _("Do you want to attempt to reconnect to
>>> the database?"),
>>>         wxString::Format(_("Connection to database %s lost."),
>>> db->GetName().c_str()),
>>> Second:
>>> "Connection resetted." -> "Connection reset."
>> OK, will do.
>> And about the fact that we're already past beta 1?
> I'd call it a bug. There is no sane way to re-establish that connection.

OK, done and pushed. Thanks.


In response to

pgadmin-hackers by date

Next:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2011-05-03 20:48:00
Subject: Re: Announcement for 1.14 beta 1?
Previous:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2011-05-03 20:45:36
Subject: pgAdmin III commit: Ask to reset connection in the query tool

pgadmin-support by date

Next:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2011-05-03 21:25:09
Subject: pgAdmin v.1.14.0 Beta 1 now available
Previous:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2011-05-03 14:47:02
Subject: Re: demande de support

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