Re: Database bar - Mailing list pgadmin-hackers
From | Guillaume Lelarge |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Database bar |
Date | |
Msg-id | 4DC46ABC.5000906@lelarge.info Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Database bar (Erwin Brandstetter <brandstetter@falter.at>) |
Responses |
Re: Database bar
|
List | pgadmin-hackers |
On 05/06/2011 04:27 PM, Erwin Brandstetter wrote: > Hi Guillaume! > > On 05.05.2011 22:50, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: >> On 05/05/2011 05:25 PM, Erwin Brandstetter wrote: >> (...) >>> - What if someone issues one of the following commands? >>> RESET role; >>> SET ROLE TO my_other_role; >>> See for yourself: >>> SELECT current_user, session_user; >>> The display in the database bar remains unchanged, rendering it wrong / >>> misleading. >> You already have this kind of issue in 1.12 and all previous releases. >> You connect with a user, you do "SET ROLE TO another_role", and the >> combobox doesn't change. You could still think you're user X, but you >> really are user another_role. >> >> The combobox only tells you how you established the connection, that's >> all. > > Speaking of which: how about "Connection bar" instead of "Database bar" > as title? > Fine to me. >>> Changing to another connection and changing back does not change the >>> situation. >> Meaning? > > One might expect, that by chosing a connection named "mydb on > myuser@myserver:port ~myrole" the role would be set as advertised. But > that's not how it works. (And I am not saying it should.) > I don't have a strong opinion here. My reasoning is this: > - pgAdmin is getting increasingly complex. > - Therefore, if a feature is of limited use while introducing chances > for errors and misunderstandings, we should consider not having it at all. > If there is use cases where the feature helps a lot, my reasoning is moot. > > >>> This could get quite hazardous. Imagine a command in the mistaken belief >>> it would be executed by the displayed role ... >>> >> As I said, it could already happen in 1.12. >>> If we keep this functionality the database bar would have to show the >>> currently active role IMHO. >> No, I won't add a parser to know if the user tried to do a "SET ROLE TO". >> >> BTW, psql does the same as us: >> >> guillaume@postgres=# create user toto; >> CREATE ROLE >> guillaume@postgres=# set role to toto; >> SET >> guillaume@postgres=> >> >> See the prompt? it doesn't say toto@postgres. Quite misleading, uh? :) >> >> Honestly, I think you're right that it's misleading and I would agree to >> add a panel to the status bar to say who's the actual role. But it means >> we will fire a "select current_user;" each time the user executes a >> query or a group of queries. Not sure everyone would like that. > > To be precise: up to 1.12 the "Database bar" only displays information > about the _connection_. This is always true, even after SET ROLE. > So does psql. > In 1.14 information about the _active role_ is added. But this can be > false. So, one solution would be to get rid of the role name in the connection combo box. Would you be happy with that solution? > Firing "select current_user" each time would be an overkill for the > purpose. I wouldn't like that. I would rather drop the feature. Typing > "SET ROLE .." is simple enough. No need to confuse others who does not > need it. > Seems good enough to be kept. > If we need to distinguish multiple connections with the same parameters, > just number / name the connections. In the case of names, one could name > it after the ROLE in use - or after some other equally important criteria. > > >>> Otherwise I would propose to drop it altogether to keep it safe and >>> simple. >>> >> -1 >> >>> - Also, the "database bar" is too narrow to show the whole connection >>> string, cutting off the relevant part at the end. See attached >>> screenshot. >>> >> We could make it bigger. But it won't auto-adjust, meaning there'll >> always be someone bugged by this. > > From what I see under Windows, i would make it broader by maybe 15 %. > That should cover most cases. (Not taking into account additional space > for the active role) > OK. -- Guillaume http://www.postgresql.fr http://dalibo.com
pgadmin-hackers by date: