On Sat, Jun 28, 2008 at 1:54 PM, Guillaume Lelarge
> Nothing is really simple on pgAdmin's coding (says the guy who tries hardly
> to compile it under Windows since last evening... grmbl... :) ).
That shouldn't be hard - what was the problem?
> I was sure I was following the "collection nodes and objects nodes" way of
> doing. Here are some ascii artwork:
>
> - Databases (3)
> + DB1
> + DB2
> - DB3
> + Catalogs (2)
> + Casts (0)
> + Languages (0)
> + Schemas (1)
> + Replication (0)
> - Text Search
> + Configurations (2)
> + Dictionaries (2)
> + Parsers (2)
> + Templates (2)
>
> Seems you're right. The Text search node is neither a collection neither an
> object one. Unfortunately, I don't have a better one.
Logically I think the design is correct - the only 'more correct' way
would be to put the objects directly under a database, but that would
be quite ugly I think.
What you propose should work - it just might need a little thought.
Maybe we need a 'pgGroupObject' node type. Something to ponder on in
spare minutes rather than your 5 days I suspect :-)
--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
