Re: Wrong description in backup docs

[Michel Feinstein]

Also, you guys should change that "double negation" fields, it's hard to
read. For example:

The section "Do not save" has the option "Owner" set to "No". Which means
"Do not, not save Ower". Which would be a lot clear if it was "Save Owner".
So the section should be called "Save" then Owner will be at "Yes".

On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 7:01 AM Abhilasha Narendra <
abhilasha.naren...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

> Sure, Dave. I will take care of this.
>
> Regards,
> Abhilasha
>
>
> On 12-Nov-2019, at 3:29 PM, Dave Page  wrote:
>
> Hi Abhilasha,
>
> Can you fix this and check for any related inconsistencies seeing as
> you're already working on the other issue we just discussed?
>
> Thanks!
>
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2019 at 10:54 PM Michel Feinstein <
> michelfeinst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The backup docs at:
>> https://www.pgadmin.org/docs/pgadmin4/4.14/backup_dialog.html
>> say:
>>
>> "Move the switch next to *$ quoting* to the* Yes position to enable*
>> dollar quoting within function bodies; if disabled, the function body will
>> be quoted using SQL standard string syntax.".
>>
>> But those are the Disable options, so either the text is wrong, or the
>> switch is inverted.
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Dave Page
> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
> Twitter: @pgsnake
>
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
>
>

Wrong description in backup docs

[Michel Feinstein]

The backup docs at:
https://www.pgadmin.org/docs/pgadmin4/4.14/backup_dialog.html
say:

"Move the switch next to *$ quoting* to the* Yes position to enable* dollar
quoting within function bodies; if disabled, the function body will be
quoted using SQL standard string syntax.".

But those are the Disable options, so either the text is wrong, or the
switch is inverted.

Re: Database Backup

[Michel Feinstein]

Ok, thanks.

On Fri, Nov 8, 2019, 10:36 Murtuza Zabuawala <
murtuza.zabuaw...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

> Hi Michel,
>
> pgAdmin4 does not take backup by itself but uses pg_dump in backend, It
> just provides GUI interface for pg_dump utility for taking backups.
> Please refer the pg_dump
> <https://www.postgresql.org/docs/current/app-pgdump.html>
> documentation if you require any specific details on backup process.
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Murtuza Zabuawala
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 6:22 AM Michel Feinstein 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi guys,
>>
>> I am about to take down a database, so I want to make a backup before, in
>> case I need to turn it on again in the future. Are there any caveats I
>> should be aware of, when using pgAdmin for the backup?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>

Database Backup

[Michel Feinstein]

Hi guys,

I am about to take down a database, so I want to make a backup before, in
case I need to turn it on again in the future. Are there any caveats I
should be aware of, when using pgAdmin for the backup?

Thanks in advance.

Re: joining tables

[Michel Feinstein]

Also, be aware that this is NOT the postgresql email list, but the pgAdmin
email list, you would get a lot more help about SQL there.

On Tue, Sep 3, 2019, 19:44 Jack Royal-Gordon  wrote:

> Let me step back a bit, as I realize upon further reflection that the
> first method will not work.
>
> As far as the issue about two “Ted” records, read it as though I said two
> “Ted D” records. It refers to two records in the same table with the same
> key value. If “Ted D” appeared twice in table 1 and twice in table 2, the
> join would give four resulting records (all combinations of the records
> from table 1 and the records from table 2 (and the records from table 3) —
> that’s fundamentally how a join works. If you don’t want that, then make
> sure that there are no duplicates within each of the tables.
>
> > On Sep 3, 2019, at 9:35 AM, TedJones  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jack
> >
> > I'm not sure if I understand your comment about two 'Ted' fields and
> > duplication of rows. In the example below there is 'Ted' twice in Table3
> 1
> > and 3 and must appear twice as I've shown in the result as the data in
> the
> > rest of the row is different. I agree with no duplication of rows if all
> of
> > the row is the same.
> >
> > Ted
> >
> > Table: 1
> > AuthorTitle   Sales   Publication Date
> > Jim   A   aa  I
> > Ted   B   bb  J
> > Dave  C   cc  K
> > Ted   D   dd  L
> >
> > Table: 2
> > AuthorPublisher
> > Jim   him
> > Ted   me
> > Dave  me
> > Will  you
> > Gary  him
> >
> > Table:3
> > AuthorTitle   Country
> > Ted   B   UK
> > Ted   D   US
> > Jim   A   UK
> > Dave  C   UK
> >
> > Combined table: Result
> > AuthorTitle   Publication DatePublisher   Sales
>  Country
> > Ted   B   J   me  bb  UK
> > Ted   D   L   me  dd  US
> > Jim   A   I   him aa  UK
> > Dave  C   K   me  cc  UK
> > Gary  nullnullhim nullnull
> > Will  nullnullyou nullnull
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sent from:
> https://www.postgresql-archive.org/PostgreSQL-pgadmin-support-f2191615.html
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

Re: Is it possible to delete records in the result?

[Michel Feinstein]

You can, click the record, not a cell, but the record itself, like a
leftmost click, then click the trash can, than click to save.

On Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 13:19  wrote:

> This is something that always drove me to insanity with the old pgAdmin
> III: that once you had made a SELECT query and got a bunch of records
> returned, there was no way to delete ones you immediately spotted with your
> eyes as "bad records". You always had to manually note the ids and then
> make a separate query for each one.
>
> Sadly, this still seems to be the case with pgAdmin 4... unless I'm
> missing something?
>

Re: Visual clutter in default view when viewing table data

[Michel Feinstein]

Please do. I am at my phone now.

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019, 11:07 Luther Goh Lu Feng  wrote:

> > One thing that helps with readability is intercalating the colors of the
> table lines (white, light gray, white, light gray).
>
> Thought it doesnt help with the visual clutter, but I do agree that it is
> a good enhancement. I am happy to help file a ticket if that is helpful
>
> --Luther
>
>
> On Friday, August 9, 2019, 9:52:18 PM GMT+8, Dave Caughey <
> caugh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> That would be pretty easy, as the generated HTML has an "even"/"odd" class.
>
> You can even manually alternating row styles by bringing up the browser's
> developer console (F12) and manually adding the following rule to the
> applied styles
>
> .ui-widget-content.slick-row.even {  background-color: #f8f8f8; }
>
> I'm not suggesting that's that's a sensible user work-around, I'm just
> pointing out that that's how simple it would be...   just add the above
> line to the .CSS file.
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 9:39 AM Michel Feinstein 
> wrote:
> > One thing that helps with readability is intercalating the colors of the
> table lines (white, light gray, white, light gray). That would be a
> very nice addition.
> >
> > On Fri, Aug 9, 2019, 09:17 Luther Goh Lu Feng  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks for the note. I have created
> https://redmine.postgresql.org/issues/4595
> >>
> >> --Luther
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Friday, August 9, 2019, 5:55:31 PM GMT+8, Aditya Toshniwal <
> aditya.toshni...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Luther,
> >>
> >> Not everyone would agree on this. But, you can raise a request here -
> https://redmine.postgresql.org/projects/pgadmin4/issues/new so that we
> can discuss on possible ways to do that.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 2:31 PM Luther Goh Lu Feng 
> wrote:
> >>> I notice that the default view in pgAdmin when viewing table rows
> seems extremely cluttered. This is in contrast to other clients on the Mac.
> I have attached screenshots to illustrate.
> >>>
> >>> I am unfamiliar with a lot of pgAdmin functionality. But I wonder if
> it makes sense to not have the following panes hidden by default when view
> table rows
> >>> - scratch pad
> >>> - query history
> >>> - query editor
> >>>
> >>> Imho, doing so could improve the user experience
> >>>
> >>> --Luther
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thanks and Regards,
> >> Aditya Toshniwal
> >> Software Engineer | EnterpriseDB India | Pune
> >> "Don't Complain about Heat, Plant a TREE"
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Re: Visual clutter in default view when viewing table data

[Michel Feinstein]

One thing that helps with readability is intercalating the colors of the
table lines (white, light gray, white, light gray). That would be a
very nice addition.

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019, 09:17 Luther Goh Lu Feng  wrote:

>
>
> Thanks for the note. I have created
> https://redmine.postgresql.org/issues/4595
>
> --Luther
>
>
>
> On Friday, August 9, 2019, 5:55:31 PM GMT+8, Aditya Toshniwal <
> aditya.toshni...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Luther,
>
> Not everyone would agree on this. But, you can raise a request here -
> https://redmine.postgresql.org/projects/pgadmin4/issues/new so that we
> can discuss on possible ways to do that.
>
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 2:31 PM Luther Goh Lu Feng 
> wrote:
> > I notice that the default view in pgAdmin when viewing table rows seems
> extremely cluttered. This is in contrast to other clients on the Mac. I
> have attached screenshots to illustrate.
> >
> > I am unfamiliar with a lot of pgAdmin functionality. But I wonder if it
> makes sense to not have the following panes hidden by default when view
> table rows
> > - scratch pad
> > - query history
> > - query editor
> >
> > Imho, doing so could improve the user experience
> >
> > --Luther
>
>
> --
> Thanks and Regards,
> Aditya Toshniwal
> Software Engineer | EnterpriseDB India | Pune
> "Don't Complain about Heat, Plant a TREE"
>
>
>

Re: Opening pgAdmin 4 in a new browser window as an alternative user flow

[Michel Feinstein]

Do it the other way around... Instead of having the browser opening the
server, have the server open the browser when it's up and running. In case
the server is shut down, just close the browser window, they will behave as
if they were one process.

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019, 01:55 Avin Kavish  wrote:

> yep, exactly. The code for that is already in the repository. But there
> are a few considerations to be made such as launching and waiting for the
> python server to be up when the window is opened, ensuring the port number
> is fixed or matches the one used by the server and some sort of secret key
> exchange and context menus.
>
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 10:13 AM Michel Feinstein <
> michelfeinst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think this would be a lot easier, as you are just basically wrapping a
>> browser with a fixed URL address.
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019, 01:39 Avin Kavish  wrote:
>>
>>> The people who want it don't want a browser window, they want an
>>> independent standalone application that is not affected by what they might
>>> do with the browser.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 10:08 AM Luther Goh Lu Feng 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  Thanks for sharing the plans for electron.
>>>>
>>>> In my feature suggestion for a new window, I am not referring to a new
>>>> window using electron, but instead I meant a new window in the existing web
>>>> browser.
>>>>
>>>> I am unfamiliar with the effort needed for electron integration. But I
>>>> suspect that opening a new window in an existing web browser should be much
>>>> more easily achievable.
>>>>
>>>> Wdyt?
>>>>
>>>> --Luther
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, August 9, 2019, 12:31:56 PM GMT+8, Ashesh Vashi <
>>>> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 9:57 AM Luther Goh Lu Feng 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > Thanks for the suggestion!. That is very useful, and would work for
>>>> me as a personal custom configuration.
>>>> >
>>>> > However, I have read some complaints in the mailing list about how
>>>> pgAdmin 4 opens a web page in a new tab, unlike pgAdmin3. I do wonder if
>>>> changing the default behaviour to open in a new window would possibly
>>>> address those complaints, make it more similar to pgAdmin 3
>>>> We would love to have a separate window for pgAdmin 4, hence - we're
>>>> already working on the POC (using electron), and it is a side line project,
>>>> and getting delayed due to limited resources working on the pgAdmin 4.
>>>>
>>>> I would like to invite other python/electron developers to help us
>>>> evolving the project in correct direction.
>>>>
>>>> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > As an aside, is there a generic command that does the default browser
>>>> in a new window? I am using firefox now and have switched to and fro from
>>>> Chrome. It would be convenient if there is a single command that applies
>>>> for both browsers!
>>>> >
>>>> > --Luther
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Friday, August 9, 2019, 12:17:57 PM GMT+8, Khushboo Vashi <
>>>> khushboo.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > Hi,
>>>> >
>>>> > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 11:18 PM Luther Goh Lu Feng 
>>>> wrote:
>>>> >> The current default behaviour of pgAdmin4 is to load a webpage in a
>>>> new default browser tab, on the extreme right of all tabs. I find that less
>>>> than ideal in the scenario where I have a large number of tabs in firefox,
>>>> eg, 50, and I will be abruptly brought to that tab when pgAdmin 4 loads
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I would like to suggest an alternative user flow, where the pgAdmin
>>>> loads in a new window. This could be an option, that could be toggled on
>>>> and off with a checkbox. I would even go as far to suspect that this may be
>>>> more welcomed as the default behaviour
>>>> >>
>>>> > pgAdmin configuration window provides the way to set the browser
>>>> options. You can set the appropriate command for your browser to always
>>>> open pgAdmin in the new window.
>>>> >
>>>> > Right click on the pgAdmin 4 taskbar icon (elephant icon) > Select
>>>> Configure > Set the command for the "Browser Command" option.
>>>> >
>>>> > I have attached the Chrome configuration for the new window for your
>>>> reference.
>>>> >
>>>> > Thanks,
>>>> > Khushboo
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Wdyt?
>>>> >>
>>>> >> --Luther
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>

Re: Opening pgAdmin 4 in a new browser window as an alternative user flow

[Michel Feinstein]

I think this would be a lot easier, as you are just basically wrapping a
browser with a fixed URL address.

On Fri, Aug 9, 2019, 01:39 Avin Kavish  wrote:

> The people who want it don't want a browser window, they want an
> independent standalone application that is not affected by what they might
> do with the browser.
>
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 10:08 AM Luther Goh Lu Feng 
> wrote:
>
>>  Thanks for sharing the plans for electron.
>>
>> In my feature suggestion for a new window, I am not referring to a new
>> window using electron, but instead I meant a new window in the existing web
>> browser.
>>
>> I am unfamiliar with the effort needed for electron integration. But I
>> suspect that opening a new window in an existing web browser should be much
>> more easily achievable.
>>
>> Wdyt?
>>
>> --Luther
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Friday, August 9, 2019, 12:31:56 PM GMT+8, Ashesh Vashi <
>> ashesh.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 9:57 AM Luther Goh Lu Feng 
>> wrote:
>> > Thanks for the suggestion!. That is very useful, and would work for me
>> as a personal custom configuration.
>> >
>> > However, I have read some complaints in the mailing list about how
>> pgAdmin 4 opens a web page in a new tab, unlike pgAdmin3. I do wonder if
>> changing the default behaviour to open in a new window would possibly
>> address those complaints, make it more similar to pgAdmin 3
>> We would love to have a separate window for pgAdmin 4, hence - we're
>> already working on the POC (using electron), and it is a side line project,
>> and getting delayed due to limited resources working on the pgAdmin 4.
>>
>> I would like to invite other python/electron developers to help us
>> evolving the project in correct direction.
>>
>> -- Thanks, Ashesh
>> >
>> >
>> > As an aside, is there a generic command that does the default browser
>> in a new window? I am using firefox now and have switched to and fro from
>> Chrome. It would be convenient if there is a single command that applies
>> for both browsers!
>> >
>> > --Luther
>> >
>> >
>> > On Friday, August 9, 2019, 12:17:57 PM GMT+8, Khushboo Vashi <
>> khushboo.va...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Thu, Aug 8, 2019 at 11:18 PM Luther Goh Lu Feng 
>> wrote:
>> >> The current default behaviour of pgAdmin4 is to load a webpage in a
>> new default browser tab, on the extreme right of all tabs. I find that less
>> than ideal in the scenario where I have a large number of tabs in firefox,
>> eg, 50, and I will be abruptly brought to that tab when pgAdmin 4 loads
>> >>
>> >> I would like to suggest an alternative user flow, where the pgAdmin
>> loads in a new window. This could be an option, that could be toggled on
>> and off with a checkbox. I would even go as far to suspect that this may be
>> more welcomed as the default behaviour
>> >>
>> > pgAdmin configuration window provides the way to set the browser
>> options. You can set the appropriate command for your browser to always
>> open pgAdmin in the new window.
>> >
>> > Right click on the pgAdmin 4 taskbar icon (elephant icon) > Select
>> Configure > Set the command for the "Browser Command" option.
>> >
>> > I have attached the Chrome configuration for the new window for your
>> reference.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Khushboo
>> >>
>> >> Wdyt?
>> >>
>> >> --Luther
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>

Re: Appreciation for pgAdmin 4's progress

[Michel Feinstein]

I always have one hand at the mouse and one at the keyboard, once I select
stuff with the mouse, I hit cntrl+c with the other hand, it's a lot
quicker. At least if you don't have any disabilities or are left handed,
ctrl+c is at the bottom right corner, where my left hand already rests.

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 14:49 richard coleman 
wrote:

> I concur.  Ctrl-C/Ctrl-V is basically muscle memory at this point.
> Unfortunately though there are times when it's particularly jarring.
> Selecting things are done in pgAdmin4 with the mouse/track ball/etc. so
> your hand is already off the keyboard.  So for example; you select an sql
> statement to copy/paste/make a small change/run a process I do all the time
> in pgAdmin4.  Select->right-click->grumble about *useless 
> options*->Ctrl-C->move
> to another area with mouse->Ctrl-V.
>
> It seems especially strange since if you select a cell in the results pane
> the copy / paste options are in *that* context menu.
>
> Question:  Why would a*nyone* ever want to 'Remove Panel', 'Detach
> Panel', or 'Add Panel' (the only options in the current query tool context
> menu)?
>
>- You can't move them outside of the tab and only within a of a
>smallish portion of the current tab.
>- You can't reattach them, so trying to use that option to rearrange
>them doesn't work.
>- The only way to *fix* it, if you've accidentally selected it is the 
> *nuclear
>*option of 'Reset Layout'.
>
> There are just certain items that people *expect* in a context menu,
> especially one that's associated with a text editor.  *None* of them
> currently exist in the context menu of the query tool.  It would be *nice* if
> that could be addressed, sooner as opposed to later.
>
> Thanks,
>
> rik.
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 12:26 PM Dave Caughey  wrote:
>
>> Correct.  But the absence of support in the context menu is a basic UI
>> usability issue. Instead we only have "remove panel", "detach panel", "add
>> panel".
>>
>> Context menus are an essential usability feature.  A context menu is
>> intended to allow the user to quickly access the basic operations that
>> apply to whatever is clicked on / selected (i.e., the "context"), and the
>> menu items should be biased towards very commonly used actions (e.g., e.g.,
>> copy/paste, new, etc.).  The most frequently used should be situated near
>> the top of the context menu to minimize the mouse movement required to get
>> to the desired operation. Less frequently-used stuff should be buried in
>> submenus because the usability hit required to get to these uncommon
>> operations is a big deal, compared with making it easier to get to the
>> common operations.
>>
>> I totally understand that you don't think it's a big issue because
>> (clearly) you're happy to use keyboard shortcuts.  But that's that way you
>> prefer to work.   But many (most?) people rely on context menus, and it's
>> just an unnecessary usability irritant when the stuff that you expect to
>> find in a context menu is missing (e.g., #4229) or when the context menu
>> hasn't had any thought given to the relative frequency of the operations
>> (e.g., right-click on a table in the navigation pane, and you'll see
>> less-frequently used operations like "Reset Statistics", "Drop Cascaded",
>> "Maintenance", all above the super-common operations that are buried under
>> "View/Edit Data..." way down at the bottom of the context menu.  I.e., the
>> table context menu is just about as far from optimal as possible!)
>>
>> Is the absence/presence and thoughtful layout of context items a major
>> functionality gap?  No.  But is it a *completely unnecessary* every-day
>> usability irritant?  Yes.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 11:52 AM Dave Page  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 4:45 PM Dave Caughey  wrote:
>>>
 No, it doesn't work.  It's logged as #4229.   It would be *really* nice
 if this were fixed.

>>>
>>> 4229 is about adding a context menu for it. It works without though -
>>> just use Ctrl/Cmd+C and Ctrl/Cmd+V. You can copy query text, cell values,
>>> entire rows, or sets of rows.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave Page
>>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
>>> Twitter: @pgsnake
>>>
>>> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>>
>>

Re: pgadmin4 - Use classic style interface, don't launch browser?

[Michel Feinstein]

I believe Firefox doesn't use one process per tab, but does use
multi-process on its own way.

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 00:08 Darren Duncan  wrote:

> Yes, every modern browser uses a separate process per browser tab.
> Besides the
> mentioned Firefox and Chrome, Safari also does it.  So generally a page
> crash
> shouldn't affect anything but that page, or if a page consumes a lot of
> RAM or
> CPU, it can be independently killed by a regular system process manager.
> --
> Darren Duncan
>
> On 2019-07-29 8:02 p.m., Avin Kavish wrote:
> > Hey Mark,
> >
> > I find this hard to believe as chrome uses process isolation per site
> >  by
> default. I
> > believe firefox does too
> > <
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Multiprocess_Firefox>.
>
> > Whenever a website crashes only that tab crashes. It will prompt you to
> recover
> > or kill that tab in isolation. I'm a web developer too and I sometimes
> let
> > infinite recursion get through in my apps but I usually end up being
> able to
> > kill the tab without affecting the rest of my work. Maybe the setting is
> turned
> > off on your pc, you can check here,
> chrome://flags/#site-isolation-trial-opt-out
> >
> > Regards,
> > Avin
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 12:01 AM Mark Murawski wrote:
> >
> > Wow.. I go on vacation for a few days and I find this heated thread
> > going full speed ahead!
> >
> > Interesting history on why the removal of the 'native interface'
> occurred.
> >
> > I do a lot of web work and routinely wind up with locked up or
> crashed
> > browsers, so having pgadmin4 run in a browser tab is less than
> ideal..
> > although sometimes I run firefox/chrome as another user to have some
> > memory/process separation so that not ALL of my browsers die when
> > chrome/firefox barfs up a big one.  I suppose I could maintain yet
> > another user and make sure I start up pgadmin4 as that.
> >
> > Would there be a possibility of embedding chromium?  Since of course
> > it's actively developed and everyone including their pet cat are
> using
> > it as a rendering engine these days (including microsoft)  Not sure
> of
> > the compatibility with the BSD license would go...
>
>
>

Re: pgadmin4 - Use classic style interface, don't launch browser?

[Michel Feinstein]

Also, I run Firefox with 4 windows, each one with hundreds of tabs (I have
easily 500+ tabs in total), I don't restart Windows 10 for months and I
don't have any issues here.

On Tue, Jul 30, 2019, 00:03 Avin Kavish  wrote:

> Hey Mark,
>
> I find this hard to believe as chrome uses process isolation per site
>  by
> default. I believe firefox does too
> .
> Whenever a website crashes only that tab crashes. It will prompt you to
> recover or kill that tab in isolation. I'm a web developer too and I
> sometimes let infinite recursion get through in my apps but I usually end
> up being able to kill the tab without affecting the rest of my work. Maybe
> the setting is turned off on your pc, you can check here,
> chrome://flags/#site-isolation-trial-opt-out
>
> Regards,
> Avin
>
> On Tue, Jul 30, 2019 at 12:01 AM Mark Murawski <
> markm-li...@intellasoft.net> wrote:
>
>> Wow.. I go on vacation for a few days and I find this heated thread
>> going full speed ahead!
>>
>> Interesting history on why the removal of the 'native interface' occurred.
>>
>> I do a lot of web work and routinely wind up with locked up or crashed
>> browsers, so having pgadmin4 run in a browser tab is less than ideal..
>> although sometimes I run firefox/chrome as another user to have some
>> memory/process separation so that not ALL of my browsers die when
>> chrome/firefox barfs up a big one.  I suppose I could maintain yet
>> another user and make sure I start up pgadmin4 as that.
>>
>> Would there be a possibility of embedding chromium?  Since of course
>> it's actively developed and everyone including their pet cat are using
>> it as a rendering engine these days (including microsoft)  Not sure of
>> the compatibility with the BSD license would go...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7/28/19 2:54 PM, richard coleman wrote:
>> > Avin,
>> >
>> > Let me start by saying;
>> > grinning_face_with_smiling_eyes.png
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 3:43 AM Avin Kavish > > > wrote:
>> >
>> > They weren't aimed directly at anyone in particular. They were
>> > suggestions for go-getters who like to take control of their own
>> > fate and instead of waiting for the randomness of the universe to
>> > deliver unto them what they seek. Maybe I should have put a warning
>> > saying "not for the faint hearted, requires effort and reading docs
>> > to accomplish"
>> > Your missive appeared directed at the fella who was complaining
>> > about the problems that pgAdmin4 relying on a browser was causing
>> > him, especially in regards to password management.  I apologize if I
>> > misunderstood.
>> >
>> > so he would need to install nodejs, npm, nativefier, either open a
>> > command line/terminal every time he wants to start pgAdmin4 or write
>> > a batch/shell script to start it.  He would also have to remember to
>> > start the pgAdmin /server/ separately and forget about using the
>> > "New pgAdmin window" function.  To add insult to injury, he'd have
>> > to have separate scripts/commands if he should want a tray icon or
>> > to run it full screen.
>> >
>> > ^ With the way you word things, even standing up sounds hard. It's
>> > all perspective, it's accomplishable with a bit of effort. While it
>> > may not be possible to get nativefier to behave as described above,
>> > because it's an automated tool, you can script electron to do all of
>> > the above for you.
>> > That depends on the person, for some people /putting in half a dozen
>> > stitches /is accomplishable with a bit of effort (heck I've done it
>> > myself, painful but surely doable).  I would still recommend someone
>> > who's sliced themselves open go to the emergency room, or at least
>> > see a doctor.  But I guess it's all a matter of /perspective/ 😉.
>> >
>> >
>> > To add insult to injury,
>> >
>> > ^ There are no insults nor injuries mate, surely nothing physical.
>> > It leads me to believe that you are referring to emotional injury.
>> > Which then leads me to conclude that you are too emotional about
>> > this whole business of administering a database thing. Or maybe you
>> > are a fan of hyperbole, I don't know. Tone is up to interpretation
>> > in written communication.
>> >
>> > Actually that's called /a figure of speech /[ *no end users were harmed
>> > in the writing of the previous email*].
>> >
>> >
>> > quite often actually.  I have /lots/ of work to do that doesn't
>> > involve a web browser.
>> >
>> > ^ Sure, do that work and also keep the web browser open? How does a
>> > web browser window interrupt your work? How is it any different from
>> > having a dedicated window open? Do you run out of RAM or something?
>> > Do you accidentally start browsin

Re: Please give pgAdmin 4 its own GUI. The constant password inputs are driving me insane...

[Michel Feinstein]

Avin,

There's a lengthy explanation about the vulnerabilies around the Master
Password, solution, if you can't find it on the list, please let me know.

In a nutshell, a malware downloaded into a machine (or a malicious browser
extension) could search for pgAdmin passwords and steal them.

Many people use pgAdmin on their personal laptops, specially on startups
and people with remote jobs, junior developers with DB access and not
security aware and etc.

Best wishes,

Michel.

PS: I am not a developer for the project, but I am the one who reported
this issue.

On Thu, Jul 25, 2019, 10:44 Avin Kavish  wrote:

> Guys I think we should take a breather on both sides, all I did was ask
> for clarification on why it was implemented. While I appreciate it, there's
> no need to sympathise with me, I don't have any feelings regarding it. Only
> that me as personal user does not need it. The original somewhat
> confrontational/ranty email was by someone else. Maybe replying to that was
> a bad idea since it may have set up the tone for the rest of the
> conversation.
>
> I think corporate security needs to be prioritised over the slight
> inconvenience presented to personal users. I think it is okay to be enabled
> by default. Perhaps maybe a more convenient menu option to turn it off
> would be nice, (but I am not asking for it maybe I'll get around to it when
> I have the time.)
>
> Peace ✌
>
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 6:56 PM richard coleman <
> rcoleman.ascen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Dave,
>>
>> There is no attack of any kind in that post.  I am sympathizing with
>> Avin.  While I agree that there are use cases where a *master password* 
>> feature
>> makes sense, I disagree that it is the *majority* of cases, or even
>> applicable to the *majority* of users.  Therefore I believe that it is
>> *implemented* poorly.  If history is any guide there will be plenty more
>> users stumbling across this list frustrated and just wanting to know how to
>> 'get rid of' or simply 'turn it off'.
>>
>> So where I wrote sympathy and solutions, you choose to see attacks.  I
>> think that says more about you than about myself.
>>
>> If the pgAdmin developers want *nothing* but praise and the occasional
>> sterile bug report they should probably stop reading, or shut down this
>> list.  After all, a link to the redmine bug report page
>>  would suffice for the latter.
>>
>> Whether writing commercial or open source software, paid or volunteer,
>> some people are *not* going to agree with your choices or decisions
>> (just as Linus).  As long as we are criticizing the software and not the
>> people writing it, the software and all of us, end up better for it.
>>
>> I hope you take the time to think about what I've written,
>>
>> rik.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 8:49 AM Dave Page  wrote:
>>
>>> Richard,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 25, 2019 at 1:08 PM richard coleman <
>>> rcoleman.ascen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Avin,

 I agree, the master password *nonsense* was poorly implemented.  I too
 wish the developers would rethink it.  Until then there is a way to disable
 it by setting an option in a config file.  I can provide more details if
 you would like (or you could look for other more expansive posts by myself
 on this topic in the list archives).

>>>
>>> You've made your feelings known many times now, and we're all well aware
>>> of them - just as you are aware that there are legitimate security concerns
>>> that caused it to be implemented (that were raised by end users), ones that
>>> arguably warrant a medium level CVSS vulnerability score
>>> (CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:H/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:N/A:N), and other concerns such as
>>> allowing a network administrator to enforce security policy that led to the
>>> design.
>>>
>>> Please refrain from any further remarks that disparage the work of
>>> people who - in many cases, voluntarily - spend hundreds or thousands of
>>> hours of their time developing software that you get to use freely.
>>> Constructive feedback and better yet ideas or code are welcome always, but
>>> repeated negativity that is borderline ad hominem is not.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dave Page
>>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
>>> Twitter: @pgsnake
>>>
>>>

Re: save SQL in PgAdmin4

[Michel Feinstein]

In that case I would say you need a "Save as..." button, whereas the "Save"
button will track changes and only save if there are any changes.

On Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 11:42 Michael Shapiro  wrote:

> Dave,
>
> I'd like to make a feature request that PgAdmin4 add a save button (that
> is always enabled) to any window that displays SQL.
> Most editors I have worked with always provide a save (and/or save as)
> even if the text has not changed.
> Even PgAdmin3 has a Save button for SQL displayed in the SQL window.
>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 9:22 AM Dave Page  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 3:09 PM Ray O'Donnell  wrote:
>>
>>> On 18/07/2019 14:43, Michael Shapiro wrote:
>>> > Then what?
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Jul 18, 2019 at 8:31 AM Ray O'Donnell >> > > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On 18/07/2019 14:28, Michael Shapiro wrote:
>>> >  > After selecting an object (eg a view) how do I save the SQL that
>>> >  > PgAdmin4 extracts from the server? I don't see a "SAVE" button.
>>> >  >
>>> >
>>> > Hi there,
>>> >
>>> > Right-click on it in the object tree (Left of screen), then select
>>> > Scripts -> (type of script required).
>>>
>>> [Please keep replies on-list, and avoid top-posting - thanks.]
>>>
>>> Now that you ask, that's a good question I just tried it myself
>>> (Scripts -> Create script), and the "Save" button is greyed out.
>>>
>>> You can activate it by making some small edit in the generated SQL, but
>>> this seems like a bug.
>>>
>>
>> Depends how you look at it. The button is looking for changes the user
>> has made, not pre populated or loaded text. It's like when you double-click
>> on a file and it opens in an editor - most will not enable the save button
>> at that point.
>>
>> --
>> Dave Page
>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
>> Twitter: @pgsnake
>>
>> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>
>

Re: How do I remove this stupid "master password"?

[Michel Feinstein]

Hi tutiluren,

I understand your frustration and I am sorry about how you feel. I am not
the developer who implemented this, but I am the guy who reported the
security vulnerability this addresses.

If you look into some past messages you will understand the issue and what
was behind the decisions by the devs. In a nutshell, it prevents malware
(either in the browser itself or in your machine, or a junior dev machine
and etc.) to scan for postgresql credentials and send them to an attacker.
It can be more then that so I advise you to read the thread if you are
further interested.

Again, I am sorry about how you feel, but this decision was definitely not
taken without a lot of thought and not by any Microsoft employees that I
know of :)

Best wishes,

Michel.


On Tue, Jul 9, 2019, 14:21  wrote:

> Not long ago, I updated pgAdmin 4 as I did every time a new version was
> available (because it wouldn't stop pestering me about it), even though
> this was a massive chore and not automated in any way. Anyway, with some
> recent version, it started popping up this obnoxious, pointless "master
> password" idiocy, every single time I tried to click or load anything. It
> just wouldn't shut up about it. I tried setting an empty password, but of
> course it wouldn't even accept that.
>
> Eventually, after wasting countless hours on trying to find out how to
> disable this unwanted "feature", realizing that there was no way to do so
> (the supposed instructions were incomplete/nonsensical), I was forced to
> downgrade to the last version. From that point on, I stopped running my
> script which checks for new versions of pgAdmin 4 and downloads them for me
> (to save some time and energy every time it wants to update).
>
> The other day, I decided that my pgAdmin is getting too old, and hopefully
> they will have removed this stupidity by now. Alas, I found that it was
> still there, but I think it looked different this time. I'm not sure.
> Either way, furious that it wouldn't go away (this kind of thing is just as
> bad as, if not *worse* than, ads), I made a single space the "master
> password".
>
> Now, I'm forced to waste my time, energy and focus every single time I
> need to admin my databases by needlessly inputting a single space and click
> a button before it lets me in. And no, it doesn't remember this because I
> clear all browser data many times a day (out of necessity). It really does
> "add up" and makes me despise the software and look at it at a chore rather
> than something useful. I thought it was already bad enough that it requires
> a browser and has a "warmup time" (the first time each time the computer
> boots)...
>
> How do I turn this off? How do I make it never appear ever again? How do I
> disable it? I have no idea who thought that this was a good idea, but I
> strongly suspect that nobody did, and it was just added to piss people off.
> I've dealt with enough "bizarre" decisions made by software authors to
> still believe that they don't know what they're doing. They know. If they
> use the software themselves, they know. This has literally *no* practical
> purpose that I can think of, and wasn't even explained. It just appeared
> randomly one day with an update. "Here's some random unwanted change for
> the worse. Deal with it, user." ... you'd almost think that Microsoft had a
> finger in the development of this program.
>
> If there is some sort of edge-case scenario where this actually makes
> sense (I cannot think of any, and I have excellent imagination...), why not
> make this OPTIONAL? Why put it there BY DEFAULT, and why FORCE us to pick a
> "master password" even if we have no need for it and it's nothing but
> unwanted stupidity that makes us hate the authors of the software and swear
> to never, ever donate or help out the project in any way? Why turn your
> users into enemies?
>
> PS: Man, I long back to the days when pgAdmin III still worked and was
> maintained. It got so bad in the end that I had to click away countless
> error boxes before I could do anything in it...
>
> PS 2: This stuff about requiring people to create an account and submit
> all our data to Google to send e-mails to this list is just insanity. What
> is wrong with you people?! You apparently have done anything to shield
> yourselves from people contacting you. This lengthy, 48-step process of
> actually getting to send this damn e-mail is incredibly tiresome and
> insulting...
>

Autocomplete

[Michel Feinstein]

Is it there any reasons for autocomplete not to work? I am trying
Cntrl+Space on Windows 10, pgAdmin 4.6 and it just ignores it completely.

Re: How to close pgAdmin4

[Michel Feinstein]

My pleasure, I am not a big fan of this either... But many applications
have this behavior, so I am kinda used to it.

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019, 11:34 George Weaver 
wrote:

> Hi Michel,
>
> Thanks!
>
> (One more inconvenient thing about pgAdmin4.)
>
> George
> On 27/06/2019 8:53 a.m., Michel Feinstein wrote:
>
> Look for it in the system tray bar, at the lower right corner of the
> screen, right click it and see the option to exit.
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019, 10:42 George Weaver  wrote:
>
>> Good morning,
>>
>> I would like to know how to "really" close pgAdmin4.
>>
>> When I close the pgAdmin4 tab or the browser supporting pgAdmin4
>> (Firefox 67.0.4), this does not close pgAdmin4.  It still resides in
>> Task Manager (Windows 10).
>>
>> This is very inconvenient.  If after closing pgAdmin4 I try and delete a
>> database via other means (eg psql) I get the following error message:
>>
>>  DROP DATABASE IF EXISTS development;
>>
>>  ERROR:  database "development" is being accessed by other users
>>  DETAIL:  There are 2 other sessions using the database.
>>
>> This forces me to start Task Manager, scroll down to pgAdmin4 and select
>> End Task.
>>
>> How do I close pgAdmin4 so it is no longer running on the computer and I
>> can avoid these nuisance steps.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> George
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
> Cleartag Software, Inc.
> 972 McMillan Avenue
> Winnipeg, MB
> R3M 0V7
> (204) 284-9839 phone/cell
> (204) 284-9838 faxgwea...@cleartagsoftware.com
>
> Fast. Accurate. Easy.
>
>

Re: [EXTERNAL] - Re: How to close pgAdmin4

[Michel Feinstein]

Correct.

pgAdmin runs as a webserver in the background, closing the Browser Tab or
Window doesn't kill the webserver itself, just the web session with the
server.

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:13 AM Michelle Schwan 
wrote:

> OK – so no close button on the actual window itself.
>
>
>
> *From:* Michel Feinstein 
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 27, 2019 10:11 AM
> *To:* Michelle Schwan 
> *Cc:* richard coleman ; George Weaver <
> gwea...@shaw.ca>; pgAdmin Support 
> *Subject:* Re: [EXTERNAL] - Re: How to close pgAdmin4
>
>
>
> Google "windows system tray".
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:09 AM Michelle Schwan 
> wrote:
>
> I do not see that icon at all in pgAdmin.  Where is that ?
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* richard coleman 
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 27, 2019 10:07 AM
> *To:* Michelle Schwan 
> *Cc:* Michel Feinstein ; George Weaver <
> gwea...@shaw.ca>; pgAdmin Support 
> *Subject:* Re: [EXTERNAL] - Re: How to close pgAdmin4
>
>
>
> Michelle,
>
>
>
> Right click the little picture of the elephant, the context menu should
> include an entry "Shut down server", select that and you will *correctly* shut
> down pgAdmin4.
>
>
>
> [image: context_menu_pgAdmin4_taskbar.png]
>
>
>
> Some of your confusion probably stems from the fact, that contrary to
> appearances, pgAdmin4 is still *not* a *desktop application*.  It would
> *really* be nice if we could get an actual desktop application, like
> pgAdmin3 was, as opposed to the lobotomized web server that pgAdmin4 is.
>
>
>
> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>
>
>
> rik.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 9:59 AM Michelle Schwan 
> wrote:
>
> Could you show a screen shot of that?  I cannot find the option to exit.
>
>
>
> *From:* Michel Feinstein 
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 27, 2019 9:54 AM
> *To:* George Weaver 
> *Cc:* pgAdmin Support 
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] - Re: How to close pgAdmin4
>
>
>
> Look for it in the system tray bar, at the lower right corner of the
> screen, right click it and see the option to exit.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019, 10:42 George Weaver  wrote:
>
> Good morning,
>
> I would like to know how to "really" close pgAdmin4.
>
> When I close the pgAdmin4 tab or the browser supporting pgAdmin4
> (Firefox 67.0.4), this does not close pgAdmin4.  It still resides in
> Task Manager (Windows 10).
>
> This is very inconvenient.  If after closing pgAdmin4 I try and delete a
> database via other means (eg psql) I get the following error message:
>
>  DROP DATABASE IF EXISTS development;
>
>  ERROR:  database "development" is being accessed by other users
>  DETAIL:  There are 2 other sessions using the database.
>
> This forces me to start Task Manager, scroll down to pgAdmin4 and select
> End Task.
>
> How do I close pgAdmin4 so it is no longer running on the computer and I
> can avoid these nuisance steps.
>
> Thanks,
>
> George
>
>

Re: [EXTERNAL] - Re: How to close pgAdmin4

[Michel Feinstein]

Google "windows system tray".

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 11:09 AM Michelle Schwan 
wrote:

> I do not see that icon at all in pgAdmin.  Where is that ?
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* richard coleman 
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 27, 2019 10:07 AM
> *To:* Michelle Schwan 
> *Cc:* Michel Feinstein ; George Weaver <
> gwea...@shaw.ca>; pgAdmin Support 
> *Subject:* Re: [EXTERNAL] - Re: How to close pgAdmin4
>
>
>
> Michelle,
>
>
>
> Right click the little picture of the elephant, the context menu should
> include an entry "Shut down server", select that and you will *correctly* shut
> down pgAdmin4.
>
>
>
> [image: context_menu_pgAdmin4_taskbar.png]
>
>
>
> Some of your confusion probably stems from the fact, that contrary to
> appearances, pgAdmin4 is still *not* a *desktop application*.  It would
> *really* be nice if we could get an actual desktop application, like
> pgAdmin3 was, as opposed to the lobotomized web server that pgAdmin4 is.
>
>
>
> ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>
>
>
> rik.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 9:59 AM Michelle Schwan 
> wrote:
>
> Could you show a screen shot of that?  I cannot find the option to exit.
>
>
>
> *From:* Michel Feinstein 
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 27, 2019 9:54 AM
> *To:* George Weaver 
> *Cc:* pgAdmin Support 
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] - Re: How to close pgAdmin4
>
>
>
> Look for it in the system tray bar, at the lower right corner of the
> screen, right click it and see the option to exit.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019, 10:42 George Weaver  wrote:
>
> Good morning,
>
> I would like to know how to "really" close pgAdmin4.
>
> When I close the pgAdmin4 tab or the browser supporting pgAdmin4
> (Firefox 67.0.4), this does not close pgAdmin4.  It still resides in
> Task Manager (Windows 10).
>
> This is very inconvenient.  If after closing pgAdmin4 I try and delete a
> database via other means (eg psql) I get the following error message:
>
>  DROP DATABASE IF EXISTS development;
>
>  ERROR:  database "development" is being accessed by other users
>  DETAIL:  There are 2 other sessions using the database.
>
> This forces me to start Task Manager, scroll down to pgAdmin4 and select
> End Task.
>
> How do I close pgAdmin4 so it is no longer running on the computer and I
> can avoid these nuisance steps.
>
> Thanks,
>
> George
>
>
>

Re: [EXTERNAL] - Re: How to close pgAdmin4

[Michel Feinstein]

[image: image.png]

The last one at the bottom, I am still at pgAdmin 4.6 though.

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 10:58 AM Michelle Schwan 
wrote:

> Could you show a screen shot of that?  I cannot find the option to exit.
>
>
>
> *From:* Michel Feinstein 
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 27, 2019 9:54 AM
> *To:* George Weaver 
> *Cc:* pgAdmin Support 
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] - Re: How to close pgAdmin4
>
>
>
> Look for it in the system tray bar, at the lower right corner of the
> screen, right click it and see the option to exit.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 27, 2019, 10:42 George Weaver  wrote:
>
> Good morning,
>
> I would like to know how to "really" close pgAdmin4.
>
> When I close the pgAdmin4 tab or the browser supporting pgAdmin4
> (Firefox 67.0.4), this does not close pgAdmin4.  It still resides in
> Task Manager (Windows 10).
>
> This is very inconvenient.  If after closing pgAdmin4 I try and delete a
> database via other means (eg psql) I get the following error message:
>
>  DROP DATABASE IF EXISTS development;
>
>  ERROR:  database "development" is being accessed by other users
>  DETAIL:  There are 2 other sessions using the database.
>
> This forces me to start Task Manager, scroll down to pgAdmin4 and select
> End Task.
>
> How do I close pgAdmin4 so it is no longer running on the computer and I
> can avoid these nuisance steps.
>
> Thanks,
>
> George
>
>
>
>

Re: How to close pgAdmin4

[Michel Feinstein]

Look for it in the system tray bar, at the lower right corner of the
screen, right click it and see the option to exit.

On Thu, Jun 27, 2019, 10:42 George Weaver  wrote:

> Good morning,
>
> I would like to know how to "really" close pgAdmin4.
>
> When I close the pgAdmin4 tab or the browser supporting pgAdmin4
> (Firefox 67.0.4), this does not close pgAdmin4.  It still resides in
> Task Manager (Windows 10).
>
> This is very inconvenient.  If after closing pgAdmin4 I try and delete a
> database via other means (eg psql) I get the following error message:
>
>  DROP DATABASE IF EXISTS development;
>
>  ERROR:  database "development" is being accessed by other users
>  DETAIL:  There are 2 other sessions using the database.
>
> This forces me to start Task Manager, scroll down to pgAdmin4 and select
> End Task.
>
> How do I close pgAdmin4 so it is no longer running on the computer and I
> can avoid these nuisance steps.
>
> Thanks,
>
> George
>
>
>
>
>

Re: pgAdmin4 4.8 Kubuntu issues

[Michel Feinstein]

Well, security is always a balance between how far your opponent is able to
go and how much you want to invest on your protection.

I agree that secret strings should live in memory for as brief as possible,
so maybe there could be an option for people that want to be prompted for
the Master Password each time pgAdmin needs a password (and properly
discards the memory space with the plaintext password). But still memory
protection is pretty advanced in Windows, Linux and Mac, so this part I
would say is almost OS independent.


On Thu, Jun 6, 2019, 10:30 richard coleman 
wrote:

> Michel,
>
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 9:15 AM Michel Feinstein 
> wrote:
>
>> *(if the malicious actor can steal the file they can also read the key
>> from memory)*
>>
>> As far as I know it's a lot easier for a program to get access to all the
>> files in a system (specially on Windows) than to dump the memory, as there
>> are memory barriers protected by the OS (and address randomization) that
>> limits the addresses a program has access.
>> That would depend on your expected adversary, and the OS you are running
>> on.
>> Sure there are read/write controls for files as well, but not as
>> restrictive as memory barriers.
>> This also depends on the OS you are running on, and how your machine's
>> been configured.
>>
>
>  If you are *really* worried about the state of your saved passwords,
> then *don't* let pgAdmin4 (or anything else for that matter) *save* them.
> The next best thing would be to encrypt them with a master password that
> the program prompts for *every time* it needs to use it.  Otherwise you
> might as well tie it to your login password and let the OS handle
> decrypting it.  The current implementation gives you the convenience of
> saving your connection passwords with a *slight* increase in security at
> the cost of locking down the application for everyone else, whether or not
> they have *any* saved connection passwords.
>
>
>> PS: Sorry for not using the fancy colors and reply marks, I am on my
>> phone.
>>
> Feedback always appreciated, lack of color forgiven ;).
>
>>
>> rik.
>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2019, 10:01 richard coleman 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dave,
>>>
>>> Thank you for getting back to me.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 5:01 AM Dave Page  wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 7:29 PM richard coleman <
>>>> rcoleman.ascen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> All passwords are stored in files of one sort or another.  Hopefully
>>>>>> those files are effectively encrypted (assuming of course that you had 
>>>>>> even
>>>>>> had pgAdmin4 save your passwords to begin with).
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Sure, in pgAdmin 4 they are (unlike pgAdmin 3 which used PostgreSQL's
>>>> .pgpass files which are plain text). However, the problem is that unless
>>>> the key to encrypt/decrypt those passwords is stored externally (e.g. in
>>>> the users brain, or on a Ubikey or similar), it is also in a file.
>>>> Then it becomes one more thing for users to forget/write down/reuse
>>>> something they already know.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Now you may have a VPN, but you also may use the same password for
>>>>>> different things, or other people might use servers that are less hard to
>>>>>> reach.
>>>>>>  The same sort of people who use the same password for a number of
>>>>>> things are just going to use that self same password as their *master
>>>>>> password* in pgAdmin4.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Sure - however, I'm not ever going to make the default security in
>>>> pgAdmin cater to people who do stupid things like that, or just assume that
>>>> people are already doing stupid things so we shouldn't bother. We will
>>>> always strive to be secure by default, within the bounds of reasonable user
>>>> experience.
>>>> The only thing you *might* be securing are saved passwords, *if* the
>>>> user has saved any.  By locking up the *entire* application behind the
>>>> master password, you are just encouraging bad behavior for little to no
>>>> gain.
>>>>
>>>>> How? pgAdmin has no way of doing that over what is essentially a web
>>>>>> application - and even if it d

Re: pgAdmin4 4.8 Kubuntu issues

[Michel Feinstein]

*(if the malicious actor can steal the file they can also read the key from
memory)*

As far as I know it's a lot easier for a program to get access to all the
files in a system (specially on Windows) than to dump the memory, as there
are memory barriers protected by the OS (and address randomization) that
limits the addresses a program has access.

Sure there are read/write controls for files as well, but not as
restrictive as memory barriers.

PS: Sorry for not using the fancy colors and reply marks, I am on my phone.


On Thu, Jun 6, 2019, 10:01 richard coleman 
wrote:

> Dave,
>
> Thank you for getting back to me.
>
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2019 at 5:01 AM Dave Page  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 7:29 PM richard coleman <
>> rcoleman.ascen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> All passwords are stored in files of one sort or another.  Hopefully
 those files are effectively encrypted (assuming of course that you had even
 had pgAdmin4 save your passwords to begin with).

>>>
>> Sure, in pgAdmin 4 they are (unlike pgAdmin 3 which used PostgreSQL's
>> .pgpass files which are plain text). However, the problem is that unless
>> the key to encrypt/decrypt those passwords is stored externally (e.g. in
>> the users brain, or on a Ubikey or similar), it is also in a file.
>> Then it becomes one more thing for users to forget/write down/reuse
>> something they already know.
>>
>
>
>>
>>
>>> Now you may have a VPN, but you also may use the same password for
 different things, or other people might use servers that are less hard to
 reach.
  The same sort of people who use the same password for a number of
 things are just going to use that self same password as their *master
 password* in pgAdmin4.

>>>
>> Sure - however, I'm not ever going to make the default security in
>> pgAdmin cater to people who do stupid things like that, or just assume that
>> people are already doing stupid things so we shouldn't bother. We will
>> always strive to be secure by default, within the bounds of reasonable user
>> experience.
>> The only thing you *might* be securing are saved passwords, *if* the
>> user has saved any.  By locking up the *entire* application behind the
>> master password, you are just encouraging bad behavior for little to no
>> gain.
>>
>>> How? pgAdmin has no way of doing that over what is essentially a web
 application - and even if it did, allowing a remotely accessible
 application (particularly one in which external programs can be configured
 and executed by users) to modify it's own configuration is a *really* bad
 idea.
  Well for a start Edge uses Microsoft's user credentials as a master
 password.  Any number of applications can access files in a *protected
 area *and prompt for a sudo/administrator credential.

>>>
>> We could do that too. Assuming users were happy to setup a Kerberos
>> infrastructure. Otherwise, we'd need to rely on browser password saving
>> which isn't always reliable. The browser intentionally doesn't allow us to
>> access locally held credentials as that would be massively insecure.
>>
>>
>>> As for the choice to make pgAdmin4 a python version of phpPgAdmin,
 there's been a lot of discussion, most of it not very favorable.  I
 guess you can chalk this up to one more reason converting pgAdmin from an
 application to a *web app* was probably not the best idea.

>>>
>> Funny that, whilst there certainly have been people who didn't like the
>> change, the *vast* majority of feedback I receive has been positive since
>> we ironed out the very early performance issues. Downloads are up massively
>> as well, and that's before you count the Docker distro that didn't exist
>> with pgAdmin 3, which has been over 5M pulls for quite some time now (I
>> don't know the banding of Dockers numbers - I assume it'll go to 10M+ at
>> some point).
>> Are you really basing *popularity* on a comparison to pgAdmin3, the same
>> version that isn't supported, and has one Windows only fork that supports
>> postgreSQL 10?  If people want a gui to administer postgreSQL 11+, the most
>> promoted one is pgAdmin4.  If pgAdmin3 supported postgreSQL 11+ most people
>> would still be using it.
>> Regardless, I'm happy with the change, and I'm happy in the knowledge
>> that most users seem to agree. Those that don't are welcome to use the LTS
>> version of pgAdmin 3 if they prefer, or other tools. It's a free world (for
>> the most part) - people can and should use what they find most productive
>> and useful for them. I will carry on working on and providing (for free)
>> the tools that interest me.
>> Just go back through the emails on this list alone and read the many
>> emails of people writing; pgAdmin3 *did* this, why doesn't pgAdmin4?
>> They are not even talking about *new* features, just simple feature
>> parity. The most recent one that comes to mind is the decision to *hide* the
>> explain results behind a "[".
>>
>>>

Re: pgAdmin4 4.8 Kubuntu issues

[Michel Feinstein]

Hi Richard,

I am jumping-in specially because I am the guy to blame for this new
feature. I identified the security risks and reported it, so I understand
your frustration and feel bad that your work flow is not as comfortable as
it was before. I hate when this happens to me.

I also think that using the OS method for storing secrets would be more
desirable, but I also understand this is way harder to achieve, since there
would be Windows, Linux and Mac specific code into the project, which is
way harder to develop than a simple Master Password.

In my particular case, I have some very big alphanumeric passwords for my
database users and a more user-friendly Master Password on my machine.
Having to remember the database passwords is a pain, so I store them
encrypted, so having a simpler Master Password is a very convenient
solution for my use case, as I don't trust any passwords to be stored
without encryption.

I am not a developer into the pgAdmin project, I am just pointing out how
this feature can be good and help some people, while improving security.

I would argue that this discussion on opt-in VS opt-out should be
investigated according to user impact. If lots of people complain, than
this should be changed, if they don't, then keep it, as it's more secure. I
know it's not going to help in your case, but seems more balanced to me on
security vs. Usage, on a more democratic way.

And again, I think the docs should explain this at length.

Sorry if my input wasn't very helpful on your use case.

Michel.

On Wed, Jun 5, 2019, 14:03 richard coleman 
wrote:

> Michel,
>
> Thanks for jumping into the conversation.
>
> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 12:18 PM Michel Feinstein <
> michelfeinst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Let me just add some points to the discussion:
>>
>> 1 - Your use case is different than most people, you have a VPN in the
>> middle of your workflow. Besides, you are imaging someone breaking into
>> your computer, but the attack vector is much simpler than that.
>>
>> Someone can craft a malware that will automatically scan for pgAdmin
>> passwords, upon arriving on any machine, and send whatever it's found to
>> his creator. This could spread all over the internet, and one of your
>> employees with less security awareness could click the wrong email
>> attachment and then leak his database credentials. Google employees have
>> been victim to physhing attacks (that's why they use smart cards now), I
>> can't imagine this won't happen somewhere else.
>>
>> Yep, that *could* happen.  But the proposed solution is to add yet
> *another* password?  If the developers were *truly *trying to increase
> the security of pgAdmin4 from this attack vector, the simplest solution
> would be to *remove* the ability of pgAdmin4 to save passwords.  Many of
> our machines use ip or other non-password based security to control access
> to our databases.  pgAdmin could force some other non-password security if
> the user wanted to save their credentials.  Or pgAdmin could save their
> credentials protected by the same mechanism the OS saves user
> credentials.
>
> Many companies don't have their databases behind a VPN, specially in cloud
>> environments (some use a VPC, some don't for many reasons, not related to
>> this topic).
>>
>> Besides, I could be wrong, but I think a malware on your computer could
>> read your pgAdmin passwords, then submit queries to your company's database
>> from inside your own computer, since it's already connected to your VPN,
>> and then send back to the attacker the results, so it won't have to steal
>> any VPN credentials, just use your own connection as a bridge. It doesn't
>> have to target you specifically, just send a ping back whenever it detects
>> pgAdmin passwords in a machine and then go to "Bridge mode". I might be
>> wrong since I almost never use a VPN and am not used to its inner workings.
>>
>>  Which just goes back to my earlier point of; 'if that's what you are
> worried about, then don't let users save passwords'.
>
>> 2 - I think the opt-out should be more streamlined, the security risks
>> should be better informed and the Master Password should only be asked if
>> the user decided to save a password in the first place.
>>
>
> I think it should be an *opt-in*.  That's how most other applications
> that utilize a master password work.
>
>>
>> 3 - pgAdmin could create an empty configuration file by default, so it
>> would be easier to locate it in all Linux distributions.
>>
>> It shouldn't need one, the user should be able to use or not use a master
> pas

Re: pgAdmin4 4.8 Kubuntu issues

[Michel Feinstein]

Let me just add some points to the discussion:

1 - Your use case is different than most people, you have a VPN in the
middle of your workflow. Besides, you are imaging someone breaking into
your computer, but the attack vector is much simpler than that.

Someone can craft a malware that will automatically scan for pgAdmin
passwords, upon arriving on any machine, and send whatever it's found to
his creator. This could spread all over the internet, and one of your
employees with less security awareness could click the wrong email
attachment and then leak his database credentials. Google employees have
been victim to physhing attacks (that's why they use smart cards now), I
can't imagine this won't happen somewhere else.

Many companies don't have their databases behind a VPN, specially in cloud
environments (some use a VPC, some don't for many reasons, not related to
this topic).

Besides, I could be wrong, but I think a malware on your computer could
read your pgAdmin passwords, then submit queries to your company's database
from inside your own computer, since it's already connected to your VPN,
and then send back to the attacker the results, so it won't have to steal
any VPN credentials, just use your own connection as a bridge. It doesn't
have to target you specifically, just send a ping back whenever it detects
pgAdmin passwords in a machine and then go to "Bridge mode". I might be
wrong since I almost never use a VPN and am not used to its inner workings.

2 - I think the opt-out should be more streamlined, the security risks
should be better informed and the Master Password should only be asked if
the user decided to save a password in the first place.

3 - pgAdmin could create an empty configuration file by default, so it
would be easier to locate it in all Linux distributions.

Those are my 2 cents.

On Wed, Jun 5, 2019, 12:55 richard coleman 
wrote:

> Dave,
>
> Actually I thought I was being quite restrained in my assessment.  With
> version 4.8 the developers completely upended the end user experience.
> From pgAdmin3 through all versions of pgAdmin4 *prior to the current one*,
> the end user could start pgAdmin and then get to work creating connections,
> modifying databases, running queries as their postgreSQL permissions
> allowed.  If they wanted to save a password, that was their choice (though
> it didn't always work).  Suddenly with pgAdmin4 4.8 they are *locked out* of
> the application by a *required* Master Password.  To make matters worse,
> there is *no* simple or even well defined way to disable this change.
> The *solution* is to dig through the documentation, then *rummage* around
> on your file system (as the exact location varies by OS or distribution)
> for a *sample* file (the config file isn't actually documented in the
> official documentation).  *Then* create a brand new file, make sure you
> include the *magic setting*, restart pgAdmin4 and you will *finally* get
> back to working the way you did *before* you let pgAdmin4 update itself
> from 4.7 to 4.8.
>
> The only situation I can envision (and perhaps I'm just not paranoid
> enough) is if someone breaks into my computer, gets my login credentials,
> gets the separate login credentials to the VPN I use to connect to the
> corporate network, and *then* manages to start pgAdmin4 as myself to
> connect to a postgreSQL database, that I've just happened to have had
> pgAdmin4 save the password to and commit some sort of mischief with my
> level of access.
>
> So, to summarize an attacker would have had to:
>
>1. hack my machine
>2. hack into the corporate network through my VPN credentials (which
>they would have to hack)
>3. run pgAdmin4 *as* me
>4. have relied on me having pgAdmin4 *save* my passwords.
>
> The only thing I gain from the new *Master Password* requirement is that
> *if* I had pgAdmin4 save my passwords, an attacker would have need to
> know one more password to *unlock* pgAdmin4.
>
> Unfortunately if I *don't* have pgAdmin4 save my passwords, I still have
> to remember a *Master Password*.  Why?  Without step 4 above, it doesn't
> actually provide anymore security.
>
> To add insult to injury I (like *many* people currently using pgAdmin4)
> have root access (or Administrator level credentials for those Windows
> users) to my own machine.  Which means it's possible for me to jump through
> all of the hoops to disable the *Master Password *mechanism.  So what did
> not having a setting in the Preferences UI gain in terms of security?  If
> you wanted to restrict changing that setting to users with the required
> level of access you could have simply gated it with a sudo/administrator
> credentials dialog.
>
> So basically what we have is a *major* UI change (users are literally
> locked out of the application) caused by upgrading a minor version level
> (4.7 to 4.8) with no simple way to revert the behavior all for a dubious
> increase in security.
>
> Yes, I think I have been quite restrai

Re: pgAdmin4 4.8 Kubuntu issues

[Michel Feinstein]

It would be easier if the system when prompting for the Master Password,
had a "I don't want to define a Master Password" or something like that,
which would set that config_local.py property automatically.

On Tue, Jun 4, 2019, 18:06 Cherio  wrote:

> Put "MASTER_PASSWORD_REQUIRED = False" line into your
> "lib/python?.?/site-packages/pgadmin4/config_local.py". This is in the
> docs: https://www.pgadmin.org/docs/pgadmin4/dev/master_password.html
>
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 4:41 PM richard coleman <
> rcoleman.ascen...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> To whomever,
>>
>> Running a newly update pgAdmin 4 version 4.8 on my Kubuntu box.  There
>> are a couple of glaring issues.
>>
>> First: It keeps prompting to; "Set Master Password"
>> I don't want to set another password that I'll just end up forgetting.
>>
>> Second: When I click the "?" button on that dialog box it takes me to
>> this page:
>> "http://127.0.0.1:33681/help/help/master_password.html";
>> Which returns "404 Not Found"
>>
>> Hopefully there is a simple solution to these issues.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> rik.
>>
>

Re: Can't see my Issue

[Michel Feinstein]

Ok, thanks for the clarification.

On Wed, May 29, 2019, 11:46 Dave Page  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 5:57 AM Michel Feinstein <
> michelfeinst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In a previous email I suggested the use of a master password. Now I can
>> see at the pgAdmin 4.7 release notes that it was shipped, so I went to the
>> issue page (#4184), but I can't find it in the issue list, and I get a 403
>> error on the issue's link.
>>
>
> It's currently hidden and will be unlocked sometime after release.
>
>
>>
>> I wanted to see the implementation and since it wasn't attributed to me
>> at the release notes or my user at Redmine, as the releases usually are,
>> does it means I am blocked from it?
>>
>
> We don't typically attribute features to people other than the author of
> the code, unless there was non-trivial work done to try to track down an
> issue or similar, for example, someone writing a complex test case or proof
> of concept.
>
> --
> Dave Page
> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
> Twitter: @pgsnake
>
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>

Can't see my Issue

[Michel Feinstein]

Hi,

In a previous email I suggested the use of a master password. Now I can see
at the pgAdmin 4.7 release notes that it was shipped, so I went to the
issue page (#4184), but I can't find it in the issue list, and I get a 403
error on the issue's link.

I wanted to see the implementation and since it wasn't attributed to me at
the release notes or my user at Redmine, as the releases usually are, does
it means I am blocked from it?

Best wishes,

Michel.

Re: How to deal with multiple accounts

[Michel Feinstein]

Thanks guys, this was very helpful :)

On Sun, May 19, 2019 at 10:34 AM Jan Birk  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> For inspiration...
>
> We have/use a lot of clusters and databases in PGadmin. In PGadmin (the
> users
> view) it is organised by product (servergroups:
>
> server-group-product01
> - server-test-database (cluster01)
> - server-pre-production (cluster02)
> - server-production (cluster03)
>
> server-group-product02
> - server-test-database (cluster01)
> - server-pre-production (etc)
> - server-production
>
> etc
>
> In our clusters we have different roles for typical use cases:
>
> - test-role-read-only
> - test-role-read-write
> - pre-production-read-only
> - ..
> etc
>
> Our users are grantet connect and a role depending of there needs. The DBA
> that
> creates the user are giving the user an initialy password.
>
> The products are organized by maintenance groups. A products production
> databases are placed in clusters that have the same type of service
> windows.
>
> We have +100 databases and people seems to we happy - as a DBA I am :-)
>
> Best
>
> /Jan
>
> søn, 19 05 2019 kl. 06:14 -0700, skrev Doug Easterbrook:
> > the setup with no password?
> >
> > what I mean by that is when adding in the server you are required to put
> in a
> > user and a password and there is a little checkbox about ’saving
> password’.
> >we don’t save password, so the user is prompted to enter it for each
> > pgadmin connection.
> >
> >
> > if all the databases are in the same cluster, then use of server groups
> and
> > servers will do nothing for you, since all the databases in the server
> are
> > listed based on the server instance you connect to.
> >
> >
> > I have not attempted to manage a bunch of databases with different
> > roles/owners within a single server since we kind of figure that if you
> are a
> > DBA .. then you are probably using pgadmin as an administration tool.
> >
> > if you are looking for a user query tool and using pgadmin for that,
> then I
> > might create different server instances.
> >
> > postgres is great .. the one thing that it does slightly different is
> that
> > users and roles CAN cross multiple databases.
> >
> > if you really want segmentation between development and production,
> creating
> > two different servers might be best.
> >
> >
> >
> > Doug Easterbrook
> > Arts Management Systems Ltd.
> > mailto:d...@artsman.com
> > http://www.artsman.com
> > Phone (403) 650-1978
> >
> > > On May 18, 2019, at 10:28 PM, Michel Feinstein <
> michelfeinst...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > Ok, just to be clear then... I have one server (an AWS RDS instance, I
> think
> > > "cluster" would be the right postgresql term), running one database,
> with
> > > multiple roles and users inside it.
> > >
> > > I am curious about your setup with no password, isn't this insecure?
> > >
> > > I am used to have several saved connections on MySQL Workbench, one
> for each
> > > role and database (cluster) type. For example:
> > >
> > > - Development Database with administrator privileges.
> > > - Development Database with user privileges.
> > > - Production Database with administrator privileges.
> > > - Production Database with user privileges.
> > >
> > > Whereas Production and Development are completely separate instances
> > > (cluster, database, RDS, whatever people call them these days).
> > >
> > > So inside pgAdmin, should I create a new "server" for each one of
> > > these, under the same database type "server group"?
> > >
> > > On Sun, May 19, 2019, 00:00 Doug Easterbrook  wrote:
> > > > if by ’server’, you mean a new instance of pgadmin talking to a
> database
> > > > ..   no,.  you  can get away with one copy of pgadmin talking to
> multiple
> > > > databases.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > if by server, you mean you open pgadmin, create a new server group,
> you
> > > > don’t need to do that either. Since server groups can be called
> > > > whatever you want, you could use server groups, I suppose, to define
> > > > people so that there is a list of people. … mostly we use them
> for
> > > > location — to group the various physical servers or locations that
> we go
> > > > to.
> > > >
> > > >
> >

Re: How to upgrade pgAdmin4

[Michel Feinstein]

Sorry but the only thing I can help is about the .asc file. It's used for
verify that the .exe you downloaded is the original one, that no one
modified it, injected some malware or something like it.

It's a digital signature used in PGP. You can search more about it online
looking for PGP or GPG. For Windows look at Kassandra, it's a program for
encryption and digital signature verification that uses PGP.

On Sun, May 19, 2019, 17:15 Shirley Shorter 
wrote:

> Hi thank-you for maintaining this wonderful program!
>
> I have pgAdmin 4 on Windows 10 installed - version 2.1
>
> I would like to keep current versions but had so much trouble connecting
> to my postgres database, I am apprehensive.
>
> My postgres is on my remote Linux server and goes through SSL with
> certificate keys.
>
> I am not much good with Linux and it took a long time to get up and
> running.
>
> So here are my questions:
>
> 1) Are there any specific types of backups I can/should perform before
> upgrading to pgAdmin 4 version 4.6
>
> 2) Am I correct to assume I just run the downloaded .exe file to
> upgrade?  What is the .exe.asc file used for?
>
> here are the files I found on the website:
>
>
> I appreciate your time!
>
> Regards,
>
> Shirley P. Shorter
>
> Holodec Office Systems LLC
>
> holodecoffice.com
>
>
>

Re: How to deal with multiple accounts

[Michel Feinstein]

Ok, just to be clear then... I have one server (an AWS RDS instance, I
think "cluster" would be the right postgresql term), running one database,
with multiple roles and users inside it.

I am curious about your setup with no password, isn't this insecure?

I am used to have several saved connections on MySQL Workbench, one for
each role and database (cluster) type. For example:

- Development Database with administrator privileges.
- Development Database with user privileges.
- Production Database with administrator privileges.
- Production Database with user privileges.

Whereas Production and Development are completely separate instances
(cluster, database, RDS, whatever people call them these days).

So inside pgAdmin, should I create a new "server" for each one of these, under
the same database type "server group"?

On Sun, May 19, 2019, 00:00 Doug Easterbrook  wrote:

> if by ’server’, you mean a new instance of pgadmin talking to a database
> ..   no,.  you  can get away with one copy of pgadmin talking to multiple
> databases.
>
>
> if by server, you mean you open pgadmin, create a new server group, you
> don’t need to do that either. Since server groups can be called
> whatever you want, you could use server groups, I suppose, to define people
> so that there is a list of people. … mostly we use them for location —
> to group the various physical servers or locations that we go to.
>
>
> if by server, you mean database —   it makes it easier on users it you
> make a new database with their user id in it and no password.   You can
> also name the server with the person’s name or function so thats its easier
> to identify which they should pick
>
>
> but there is no getting around just double licking on a single server and
> entering a username/password — its just the way pgadmin seems to have been
> designed for eons.
>
>
> personally, I like that it saves my user id — and I supply the password..
>
>
> thats how we use it.
>
>
> *Doug Easterbrook*
> *Arts Management Systems Ltd.*
> mailto:d...@artsman.com 
> http://www.artsman.com
> Phone (403) 650-1978
>
> On May 18, 2019, at 3:19 PM, Michael Shapiro  wrote:
>
> I'd like to know how people do this as well. I have been creating new
> Servers for each account.
>
> On Sat, May 18, 2019 at 5:16 PM Michel Feinstein <
> michelfeinst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi guys, I am looking for opinions on how you use pgAdmin for dealing
>> with several accounts.
>>
>> For example, I have an "admin" account with all the privileges for the
>> database and a "restricted" account for my application to use. I also have
>> some other accounts for other purposes and I was looking for a convenient
>> way to log into those accounts and use pgAdmin with their privileges.
>>
>> In MySQL Workbench this was fairly simple, since you configure
>> Connections, but in pgAdmin you configure Servers instead, and all those
>> accounts are new connections to the same Server.
>>
>> So do you guys just create a new Server for each account/login on
>> pgAdmin, or do you have some other trick on how to deal this this?
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Michel.
>>
>
>

How to deal with multiple accounts

[Michel Feinstein]

Hi guys, I am looking for opinions on how you use pgAdmin for dealing with
several accounts.

For example, I have an "admin" account with all the privileges for the
database and a "restricted" account for my application to use. I also have
some other accounts for other purposes and I was looking for a convenient
way to log into those accounts and use pgAdmin with their privileges.

In MySQL Workbench this was fairly simple, since you configure Connections,
but in pgAdmin you configure Servers instead, and all those accounts are
new connections to the same Server.

So do you guys just create a new Server for each account/login on pgAdmin,
or do you have some other trick on how to deal this this?

Best wishes,

Michel.

Re: pgAdmin can't create Expression Indexes

[Michel Feinstein]

Well, Github is a private company, but the vast majority of open-source
projects are there now, Microsoft owns it and made a statement about it...
I can't imagine this changing, it would be a huge PR nightmare for
Microsoft.

I am used to have Stackoverflow for questions and Github for issues, but
your workflow here is not bad.

On Wed, May 15, 2019, 10:02 Dave Page  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:54 PM  wrote:
>
>> I'm afraid I agree with this. Also, with my most recent concern, I found
>> that I was posting an issue to the tracker, then responding by email to
>> individuals from the mailing list who offered possible solutions. Some of
>> the potentially useful information ended up in the tracker, but much of it
>> got lost in emails that were more or less private. The record of what did
>> and did not finally solve the problem is scattered about, not in a single
>> place.
>
>
> Moving to Github issues won't solve that - it would just move one of the
> places to a privately owned third party site over which we have no control.
>
> We certainly would never want to try to move our primary communications to
> a tracker either - that would be horrific.
>
> --
> Dave Page
> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
> Twitter: @pgsnake
>
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>

Re: pgAdmin can't create Expression Indexes

[Michel Feinstein]

Yes, this doesn't affect me, but it just seems to be the wrong workflow,
but if you guys don't get annoyed about it, then it's fine I guess.

On Wed, May 15, 2019, 09:27 Dave Page  wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:01 PM Michel Feinstein <
> michelfeinst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Well, I did a quick look at it and I could see it indeed has more
>> options... But for external people (like me) it seems more complicated to
>> file Issues and keep track of them.
>>
>> On Github I would open the project's page, open a new issue, and every
>> time there is a new message for my issue (and only my issue) I will be
>> notified by email. If anyone wants to know what we spoke about it, all the
>> thread is right there on the Issue page.
>>
>> But currently if I want to file a bug or a feature I have to enroll to an
>> email list to communicate it, so I will receive messages for everything,
>> every day, which is not in my interest, so I will unsubscribe from this
>> mailing list and stop receiving messages for everything, including the only
>> think I care about. If I want to check what was argued about an issue in
>> the past, I have to search into several emails, not as clean as an Issue
>> thread.
>>
>
> Not according to the website: https://www.pgadmin.org/support/
>
>
>
>> Also, I didn't have to login to file a bug report, I could set the
>> priority, assign it to people, I had apparently lots of control over it.
>>
>
> I'm not sure how that's an issue? It's mildly annoying for us when people
> set the priority of a typo fix to "Immediate", assign it to a developer and
> set the target version, but that shouldn't affect you - and you don't have
> to fill in those details.
>
>
>
>> Not even to mention the interface seems bulky and outdated (but this is
>> minor aesthetics, so I don't take this seriously).
>>
>
> I'll take functionality and fitness for purpose over pretty any day :-)
>
>
>>
>> Github Issues aren't as complete, but I think it has enough, you can set
>> it to a milestone, label it, assign it to people, automatically close it
>> with a commit and a pull request, easy to see, follow and track what's
>> related to it... All of it with user access control, on who can do what...
>> But if your current system has more stuff and you like it, it's fine, it's
>> just gave me the appearance of being clunkier, and definitely not as easy
>> for someone from outside of the project to jump-in, report, jump-out and
>> get eventual updates.
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Michel.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2019, 05:31 Ray O'Donnell  wrote:
>>
>>> On 15 May 2019 06:59:11 Michel Feinstein 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I will...but just to add my 2 cents, it would be a lot better if you
>>>> guys could move to Github and use their Issue system instead.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why? - Just curious.
>>>
>>> Ray.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:43 AM Aditya Toshniwal <
>>>> aditya.toshni...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 7:46 AM Michel Feinstein <
>>>>> michelfeinst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I can't find a way to create an Expression Index such as:
>>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, it's not there. You can raise a feature request here -
>>>>> https://redmine.postgresql.org/projects/pgadmin4/issues
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> CREATE UNIQUE INDEX idx_lower_unique
>>>>>>ON your_table (lower(the_column));
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am I missing something or does pgAdmin really doesn't support it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Michel.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Thanks and Regards,
>>>>> Aditya Toshniwal
>>>>> Software Engineer | EnterpriseDB India | Pune
>>>>> "Don't Complain about Heat, Plant a TREE"
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Dave Page
> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
> Twitter: @pgsnake
>
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>

Re: pgAdmin can't create Expression Indexes

[Michel Feinstein]

Well, I did a quick look at it and I could see it indeed has more
options... But for external people (like me) it seems more complicated to
file Issues and keep track of them.

On Github I would open the project's page, open a new issue, and every time
there is a new message for my issue (and only my issue) I will be notified
by email. If anyone wants to know what we spoke about it, all the thread is
right there on the Issue page.

But currently if I want to file a bug or a feature I have to enroll to an
email list to communicate it, so I will receive messages for everything,
every day, which is not in my interest, so I will unsubscribe from this
mailing list and stop receiving messages for everything, including the only
think I care about. If I want to check what was argued about an issue in
the past, I have to search into several emails, not as clean as an Issue
thread. Also, I didn't have to login to file a bug report, I could set the
priority, assign it to people, I had apparently lots of control over it.
Not even to mention the interface seems bulky and outdated (but this is
minor aesthetics, so I don't take this seriously).

Github Issues aren't as complete, but I think it has enough, you can set it
to a milestone, label it, assign it to people, automatically close it with
a commit and a pull request, easy to see, follow and track what's related
to it... All of it with user access control, on who can do what... But if
your current system has more stuff and you like it, it's fine, it's just
gave me the appearance of being clunkier, and definitely not as easy for
someone from outside of the project to jump-in, report, jump-out and get
eventual updates.

Best wishes,

Michel.



On Wed, May 15, 2019, 05:31 Ray O'Donnell  wrote:

> On 15 May 2019 06:59:11 Michel Feinstein 
> wrote:
>
>> I will...but just to add my 2 cents, it would be a lot better if you guys
>> could move to Github and use their Issue system instead.
>>
>
> Why? - Just curious.
>
> Ray.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:43 AM Aditya Toshniwal <
>> aditya.toshni...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 7:46 AM Michel Feinstein <
>>> michelfeinst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I can't find a way to create an Expression Index such as:
>>>>
>>> Yes, it's not there. You can raise a feature request here -
>>> https://redmine.postgresql.org/projects/pgadmin4/issues
>>>
>>>>
>>>> CREATE UNIQUE INDEX idx_lower_unique
>>>>ON your_table (lower(the_column));
>>>>
>>>> Am I missing something or does pgAdmin really doesn't support it?
>>>>
>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>
>>>> Michel.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks and Regards,
>>> Aditya Toshniwal
>>> Software Engineer | EnterpriseDB India | Pune
>>> "Don't Complain about Heat, Plant a TREE"
>>>
>>
>

Re: pgAdmin can't create Expression Indexes

[Michel Feinstein]

I will...but just to add my 2 cents, it would be a lot better if you guys
could move to Github and use their Issue system instead.

On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 1:43 AM Aditya Toshniwal <
aditya.toshni...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 7:46 AM Michel Feinstein <
> michelfeinst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I can't find a way to create an Expression Index such as:
>>
> Yes, it's not there. You can raise a feature request here -
> https://redmine.postgresql.org/projects/pgadmin4/issues
>
>>
>> CREATE UNIQUE INDEX idx_lower_unique
>>ON your_table (lower(the_column));
>>
>> Am I missing something or does pgAdmin really doesn't support it?
>>
>> Best wishes,
>>
>> Michel.
>>
>
>
> --
> Thanks and Regards,
> Aditya Toshniwal
> Software Engineer | EnterpriseDB India | Pune
> "Don't Complain about Heat, Plant a TREE"
>

pgAdmin can't create Expression Indexes

[Michel Feinstein]

I can't find a way to create an Expression Index such as:

CREATE UNIQUE INDEX idx_lower_unique
   ON your_table (lower(the_column));

Am I missing something or does pgAdmin really doesn't support it?

Best wishes,

Michel.

Re: pgAdmin Saved Password Security

[Michel Feinstein]

Hi Dave,

Thank you for your response.

Where and how is the AES key safely  stored then, in order to decript the
encrypted password? Or upon choosing to save a password we have to enter a
master password?

Best wishes,

Michel.


On Wed, Apr 17, 2019, 05:05 Dave Page  wrote:

> Hi
>
> On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 7:20 AM Michel Feinstein <
> michelfeinst...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am new to pgAdmin and PostgreSQL. I am configuring a new server
>> connection and I can see there's an option to save my server's password.
>>
>> How secure is this option? Does it save my password as plaintext or does
>> it save inside Windows protection or other form of encryption?
>>
>
> It uses AES encryption in CFB8 mode provided by the Python encryption
> module. The data is then base64 encoded and stored in the SQLite
> configuration database that holds user settings.
>
> --
> Dave Page
> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
> Twitter: @pgsnake
>
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>

pgAdmin Saved Password Security

[Michel Feinstein]

Hi,

I am new to pgAdmin and PostgreSQL. I am configuring a new server
connection and I can see there's an option to save my server's password.

How secure is this option? Does it save my password as plaintext or does it
save inside Windows protection or other form of encryption?

Best wishes,

Michel.