Re: More information about the selected objects

>
> I can test the PPAS stuff, but not the Greenplum objects. But... they
> shouldn't be an issue - if an object is derived from pgSchema, you can
> (and should use GetSchema(). If it's derived from a pgTable, you
> probably want the table name too. If it's derived from pgObject,
> pgServer, pgDatabase, then there's no schema available.
>

Ok. No problems here.

- First, the patch exhibits exactly the problem I was talking about.
> See the attached screenshot, which is just a mess. All of the names
> (server, object, username etc) are real. None are made up. And yes,
> despite what Microsoft seem to be wanting people to do from Windows 8
> onwards, I usually don't have full screen windows, but tend to work
> with smaller ones side-by-side.
>

Really. Your servers have very long names. This should happen only at lower
resolutions.

And if we put a configuration option? The user decides if he wants this
option or not.

Or to put this information somewhere else, but where?

> - Not only do I see truncated names, but more importantly the "Done."
> is not visible. That is *essential*, for obvious reasons.
>

Yes, I agree.

>
> - We try to avoid referring to servers by their hostname/IP address in
> the UI (anywhere we do, is an oversight). You should be showing the
> name. In my case, for remote servers that tends to be the hostname
> anyway. For local servers though, it's usually a string like
> "PostgreSQL 9.1" or "Postgres Plus Advanced Server 9.1". The reasoning
> is that the name is a memorable string that the user can easily
> recognise, whilst the hostname or IP address usually isn't (for
> example, Amazon EC2 hostnames - which of course, are also very long).
>

Here, also without problems. I agree too.