Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Support for Slony 2.0?
On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 21:19 +0100, Guillaume Lelarge wrote: > But before working on this, I want to make sure this won't be a > useless effort. So I guess I would like to have a final decision on > this. Do we decide to drop Slony support in 1.14, or do we decide that > I can work on it, fix it, add support for 2.0, etc.? ...from a PoV of a user or a DBA from field, we need a real GUI that helps people to setup a Slony-I cluster easily -- or say, as easy as possible. So, if it is not too much effort, I'd say we need to support Slony. Cheers, -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer PostgreSQL RPM Repository: http://yum.pgrpms.org Community: devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr http://www.gunduz.org Twitter: http://twitter.com/devrimgunduz signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Support for Slony 2.0?
2011/1/20 Devrim GÜNDÜZ : > ...from a PoV of a user or a DBA from field, we need a real GUI that > helps people to setup a Slony-I cluster easily -- or say, as easy as > possible. I'm just not sure that PgAdmin actually makes setting up a Slony-I cluster easier than writing a Slonik script. It probably makes maintaining an existing cluster easier though. -- Regards, Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Support for Slony 2.0?
On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 18:37 +, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > > > ...from a PoV of a user or a DBA from field, we need a real GUI that > > helps people to setup a Slony-I cluster easily -- or say, as easy as > > possible. > > I'm just not sure that PgAdmin actually makes setting up a Slony-I > cluster easier than writing a Slonik script. It probably makes > maintaining an existing cluster easier though. I pretty much agree with you -- but not all people can use cli, or can maintain Slony-I using altperl tools. -- Devrim GÜNDÜZ PostgreSQL Danışmanı/Consultant, Red Hat Certified Engineer PostgreSQL RPM Repository: http://yum.pgrpms.org Community: devrim~PostgreSQL.org, devrim.gunduz~linux.org.tr http://www.gunduz.org Twitter: http://twitter.com/devrimgunduz signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Support for Slony 2.0?
2011/1/20 Devrim GÜNDÜZ : > I pretty much agree with you -- but not all people can use cli, or can > maintain Slony-I using altperl tools. I use the command line for lots of things, but I also find GUI tools like PgAdmin useful. For example, I have a strong preference for developing Postgres functions using PgAdmin. I think that I have a rather balanced view. I also think that the ability to organise things in a slonik script in a way that makes sense for you (ordering things in a domain specific, logical manner with plenty of comments) is just easier than doing it the PgAdmin way for any person, not just a person who has a general preference for using command line tools. If you don't agree with this, try managing Slony replication for more than 2 or 3 nodes using PgAdmin. -- Regards, Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Support for Slony 2.0?
Le 20/01/2011 19:39, Devrim GÜNDÜZ a écrit : > On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 18:37 +, Peter Geoghegan wrote: >> >>> ...from a PoV of a user or a DBA from field, we need a real GUI that >>> helps people to setup a Slony-I cluster easily -- or say, as easy as >>> possible. >> >> I'm just not sure that PgAdmin actually makes setting up a Slony-I >> cluster easier than writing a Slonik script. It probably makes >> maintaining an existing cluster easier though. > > I pretty much agree with you -- but not all people can use cli, or can > maintain Slony-I using altperl tools. Maybe they could if they would. But most of them don't want to use a CLI tool. And there are probably many things to do to make it look better on pgAdmin. I never used the replication part of pgAdmin till this week. I had a look at it and it's really interesting. -- Guillaume http://www.postgresql.fr http://dalibo.com -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Support for Slony 2.0?
Why don't we have a wizard-type facility to generate a Slonik script, rather than calling the "bare-metal" functions ourselves? That could potentially be much more useful. The reason that the existing facilities are a bit of a chore to use when you get past a couple of nodes is that paths and listens have to be individually managed, and the number involved increases quadratically with respect to the number of nodes. In other words, it's a GUI analogue of writing a Slonik script, as opposed to a higher level facility that usefully abstracts details away. I could imagine this really helping with complicated Slony setups involving daisy-chaining. -- Regards, Peter Geoghegan -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Support for Slony 2.0?
Le 20/01/2011 20:15, Peter Geoghegan a écrit : > Why don't we have a wizard-type facility to generate a Slonik script, > rather than calling the "bare-metal" functions ourselves? That could > potentially be much more useful. The reason that the existing > facilities are a bit of a chore to use when you get past a couple of > nodes is that paths and listens have to be individually managed, and > the number involved increases quadratically with respect to the number > of nodes. In other words, it's a GUI analogue of writing a Slonik > script, as opposed to a higher level facility that usefully abstracts > details away. > > I could imagine this really helping with complicated Slony setups > involving daisy-chaining. > We don't do wizards. Moreover, I'm not sure this would be really useful. But if you want to work on it, yes, go ahead. And we'll see how it goes. -- Guillaume http://www.postgresql.fr http://dalibo.com -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Support for Slony 2.0?
A wizard as you suggest has been on my "if only i had the time and energy" todo list for a few years :-) On 1/20/11, Peter Geoghegan wrote: > Why don't we have a wizard-type facility to generate a Slonik script, > rather than calling the "bare-metal" functions ourselves? That could > potentially be much more useful. The reason that the existing > facilities are a bit of a chore to use when you get past a couple of > nodes is that paths and listens have to be individually managed, and > the number involved increases quadratically with respect to the number > of nodes. In other words, it's a GUI analogue of writing a Slonik > script, as opposed to a higher level facility that usefully abstracts > details away. > > I could imagine this really helping with complicated Slony setups > involving daisy-chaining. > > -- > Regards, > Peter Geoghegan > > -- > Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) > To make changes to your subscription: > http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers > -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
Re: [pgadmin-hackers] Patch to support SSL certificate connections
Le 19/01/2011 00:35, Guillaume Lelarge a écrit : > Hi, > > This patch adds support to specify SSL certificate files and to connect > according to those. > > It's pretty straightforward: four file pickers to handle on dlgServer, > and changes in the connection code to add those parameters in the > connection string. > A screenshot attached so that you can see the UI without building pgAdmin :) Comments? -- Guillaume http://www.postgresql.fr http://dalibo.com <> -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
