Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fDAIp-0004nJ-Cz for pgadmin-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Apr 2018 15:01:19 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fDAIo-0000fd-BZ for pgadmin-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Apr 2018 15:01:18 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:1501:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fDAIn-0000fT-M6 for pgadmin-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Apr 2018 15:01:18 +0000 Received: from mail-ot0-x231.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c0f::231]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1fDAIi-0000Iy-LW for pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org; Mon, 30 Apr 2018 15:01:16 +0000 Received: by mail-ot0-x231.google.com with SMTP id h8-v6so9784705otb.2 for ; Mon, 30 Apr 2018 08:01:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=enterprisedb-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Ol/rtzsbTsFqizJi95CNpQL/6dPmmcYIDGeZC6rfQSA=; b=KkAiq30Itv0vOIvByHzFUjkcNu6adegAJguJZtqTzKRGfCjb9gQ4cI9b+gp9Q6Ad34 sqRAgP/tMMkseOmyf2w2v2mH2M8FCIPI+dJ0g8m/pzZsfinj/HbYm3FKDwypJWR5uEtB NW8nTJ0DpLy81iOohALeenysktG4AShZiCjILzIIWp5Ebubv0jdZXa7fH2mvtkO0W5pK eA2fU/nElCkVpnFfnYsxEdxcV/dWfmeB+gDJlMfdv+1hwOhoYPYHW94E3JWEA+sLbcVx X4t86u3gxy+ybcw8M0pp69eS69Dgo9ThmjuCdYfWdgX8IOryYdpG8WIB/9va0is02Ayy PvEA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Ol/rtzsbTsFqizJi95CNpQL/6dPmmcYIDGeZC6rfQSA=; b=akdqcPCJGfkNnix+pdU7P5Ri7tFSGkpFxguV/QJ0qGHdkZMSbjGQKgdGVwYoaYnEBw tLdasJEtb5v7T6Z578ZyQ+Ue7qva26UNUqwnuFluuGTVO+cuGLoiHMW0LY8VwMZBsRZA qTshg8iEg0S5klLBVuEvQSVHwRAAY9Uunly3f7MgxO+fAjn/yZN8WD4WgE4kcRe43pST +eXbj8nXrNivzSZ+nW0CcO3zxplRlFl0Eif8mI6uXF1Y55rOZSSMi8jEa5cdA6gMeqLa NiUrWsDRIqE5ly8zw2TWG3KOt/f5unIxXCfRVg0MyMnsb4O33uSLXzRi1tMzQABOCA95 Ui2w== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tCR7EG/Xp1xbu2o09/DGQlzYN1crP0oAroKEDtnIQxoxkdGYz04 EInuiAXl/FvPa2GQZZs0NiMCKOHKWznZQ6WB/NaB8A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZpsaLdL2GkDTVVe28EFxTjQ8iC0KeFTUzBq/YTKfFj43ZxDB1bLP9sALcjHEr47A/Y49DrewL6EVK3/wRWNQOg= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:3f6:: with SMTP id f109-v6mr8076502otf.228.1525100470384; Mon, 30 Apr 2018 08:01:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.138.5.130 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Apr 2018 08:00:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Ashesh Vashi Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2018 20:30:49 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [pgadmin4][patch] Initial patch to decouple from ACI Tree To: Joao De Almeida Pereira Cc: Dave Page , Khushboo Vashi , Murtuza Zabuawala , pgadmin-hackers Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000c8ddca056b121fb7" List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk --000000000000c8ddca056b121fb7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira < jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote: > Hi Hackers, > As you are aware we kept on working on the patch, so we are attaching to > this email a new version of the patch. > This new version contains all the changes in the previous one plus more > extractions of functions and refactoring of code. > > The objective of this patch is to create a separation between pgAdmin and > the ACI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at this point in > time we have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I found a very > interesting article that really talks about this: > https://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the- > devil-35ed28b556d > > In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of the > code, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a > application that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release at= a > times notice. > > We are investing a big chunk of our time in doing this refactoring, but > while doing that we also try to respond to the patches sent to the mailin= g > list. We would like the feedback from the community because we believe th= is > is a changing point for the application. The idea is to change the way we > develop this application, instead of only correcting a bug of developing = a > feature, with every commit we should correct the bug or develop a feature > but leave the code a little better than we found it (Refactoring, > refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is what the users > from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers. > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > It is a huge patch > 86 files changed, 5492 inserts, 1840 deletions > and we would like to get your feedback as soon as possible, because we ar= e > continuing to work on it which means it is going to grow in size. > > > At this point in time we still have 124 of 176 calls to the function > itemData from ACITree. > > What does each patch contain: > 0001: > Very simple patch, we found out that the linter was not looking into al= l > the javascript test files, so this patch will ensure it is > Committed the patch along with the regression introduced because of this patch. > > 0002: > New Tree abstraction. This patch contains the new Tree that works as an > adaptor for ACI Tree and is going to be used on all the extractions that = we > are doing. > I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, and aciTree adaptor. Please find the patch for the example. It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace with the new implemenation in future. > > 0003: > Code that extracts, wrap with tests and replace ACI Tree invocations. > There are many small cases left in the patches. Hence - I would like to know the TODO list created by you. e.g. When we remove any of the object from the database server, we're not yet removing the respective node from the new implementation, and its children. > > We start creating new pattern for the location of Javascript files and > their structure. > I would not like to see that changes in this patch. I would like us to come up with the actual design about the hot pluggability before going in this direction. > Create patterns for creation of dialogs (backup and restore) > It's better - we don't change the directory structure at the moment. I am not against dividing the big javascript files in small chunks, but - I would like us to discuss first about the hot plugins design first. -- Thanks, Ashesh > > > > Thanks > Joao > > > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:34 AM Ashesh Vashi < > ashesh.vashi@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > >> I have quite a few comments for the patch. >> I will send them soon. >> >> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 14:45 Dave Page wrote: >> >>> How is your work on this going Ashesh? Will you be committing today? >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 8:52 AM, Dave Page wrote: >>> >>>> Ashesh; you had agreed to work on this early this week. Please ensure >>>> you do so today. >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Joao De Almeida Pereira < >>>> jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi Hackers, >>>>> >>>>> Can someone review and merge this patch? >>>>> >>>>> Thanks >>>>> Joao >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:23 AM Joao De Almeida Pereira < >>>>> jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi Hackers, >>>>>> Any other comment about this patch? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks >>>>>> Joao >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 12:00 PM Joao De Almeida Pereira < >>>>>> jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello Khushboo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2018 at 1:59 AM Khushboo Vashi < >>>>>>> khushboo.vashi@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi Joao, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I have reviewed your patch and have some suggestions. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira < >>>>>>>> jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hello Murtuza/Dave, >>>>>>>>> Yes now the extracted functions are spread into different files. >>>>>>>>> The intent would be to make the files as small as possible, and a= lso to >>>>>>>>> group and name them in a way that would be easy to understand wha= t each >>>>>>>>> file is doing without the need of opening it. >>>>>>>>> As a example: >>>>>>>>> static/js/backup will contain all the backup related >>>>>>>>> functionality inside of this folder we can see the file: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> menu_utils.js At this moment in time we decided to group all the >>>>>>>>> functions that are related to the menu, but we can split that als= o if we >>>>>>>>> believe it is easier to see. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> It's really very good to see the separated code for backup module. >>>>>>>> As we have done for backup, we would like do it for other PG utili= ties like >>>>>>>> restore, maintenance etc. >>>>>>>> Considering this, we should separate the code in a way that some o= f >>>>>>>> the common functionalities can be used for other modules like men= u (as you >>>>>>>> have mentioned above), dialogue factory etc. >>>>>>>> Also, I think these functionalities should be in their respective >>>>>>>> static folder instead of pgadmin/static. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> About the location of the files. The move of the files to >>>>>>> pgadmin/static/js was made on purpose in order to clearly separate >>>>>>> Javascript from python code. >>>>>>> The rational behind it was >>>>>>> - Create a clear separation between the backend and frontend >>>>>>> - Having Javascript code concentrated in a single place, hopefully, >>>>>>> will encourage to developers to look for a functionality, that is a= lready >>>>>>> implemented in another modules, because they are right there. (When= we >>>>>>> started this journey we realized that the 'nodes' have a big groups= of code >>>>>>> that could be shared, but because the Javascript is spread everywhe= re it is >>>>>>> much harder to look for it) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There are some drawbacks of this separation: >>>>>>> - When creating a new module we will need to put the javascript in = a >>>>>>> separate location from the backend code >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> static/js/datagrid folder contains all the datagrid related >>>>>>>>> functionality >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Same as backup module, this should be in it's respective static/j= s >>>>>>>> folder. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Inside of the folder we can see the files: >>>>>>>>> get_panel_title.js is responsible for retrieving the name of the >>>>>>>>> panel >>>>>>>>> show_data.js is responsible for showing the datagrid >>>>>>>>> show_query_tool.js is responsible for showing the query tool >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Does this structure make sense? >>>>>>>>> Can you give an example of a comment that you think is missing an= d >>>>>>>>> that could help? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> As a personal note, unless the algorithm is very obscure or very >>>>>>>>> complicated, I believe that if the code needs comments it is a si= gnal that >>>>>>>>> something needs to change in terms of naming, structure of the pa= rt in >>>>>>>>> question. This being said, I am open to add some comments that mi= ght help >>>>>>>>> people. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You are right, with the help of naming convention and structure of >>>>>>>> the code, any one can get the idea about the code. But it is very = useful to >>>>>>>> understand the code >>>>>>>> very easily with the proper comments especially when there are >>>>>>>> multiple developers working on a single project. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I found some of the places where it would be great to have comment= s. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> - treeMenu: new tree.Tree() in a browser.js >>>>>>>> - tree.js (especially Tree class) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> About the comment point I need a more clear understanding on what >>>>>>> kind of comments you are looking for. Because when you read the fun= ction >>>>>>> names you understand the intent, what they are doing. The parameter= s also >>>>>>> explain what you need to pass into them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If what you are looking for in these comments is the reasoning bein= g >>>>>>> the change itself, then that should be present in the commit messag= e. >>>>>>> Specially because this is going to be a very big patch with a very = big >>>>>>> number of changes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>> Joao >>>>>>>>> =E2=80=8B >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Khushboo >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 4:48 AM Murtuza Zabuawala < >>>>>>>>> murtuza.zabuawala@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Hi Joao, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Patch looks good and working as expected. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I also agree with Dave, Can we please add some comments in each >>>>>>>>>> file which can help us to understand the flow, I'm saying becaus= e now the >>>>>>>>>> code is segregated in so many separate files it will be hard to = keep track >>>>>>>>>> of the flow from one file to another when debugging. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> Regards, >>>>>>>>>> Murtuza Zabuawala >>>>>>>>>> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com >>>>>>>>>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 7:08 PM, Joao De Almeida Pereira < >>>>>>>>>> jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Khushboo, >>>>>>>>>>> Attached you can find both patches rebased >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 6:31 AM Khushboo Vashi < >>>>>>>>>>> khushboo.vashi@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Joao, >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Can you please rebase the second patch? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>>>>>> Khushboo >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 3, 2018 at 12:15 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira < >>>>>>>>>>>> jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Hackers, >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Attached you can find the patch that will start to decouple >>>>>>>>>>>>> pgAdmin from ACITree library. >>>>>>>>>>>>> This patch is intended to be merged after 3.0, because we do >>>>>>>>>>>>> not want to cause any entropy or delay the release, but we wa= nt to start >>>>>>>>>>>>> the discussion and show some code. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> This job that we started is a massive tech debt chore that >>>>>>>>>>>>> will take some time to finalize and we would love the help of= the community >>>>>>>>>>>>> to do it. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *Summary of the patch:* >>>>>>>>>>>>> 0001 patch: >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Creates a new tree that will allow us to create a >>>>>>>>>>>>> separation between the application and ACI Tree >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Creates a Fake Tree (Test double, for reference on the >>>>>>>>>>>>> available test doubles: https://martinfowler. >>>>>>>>>>>>> com/bliki/TestDouble.html) that can be used to inplace to >>>>>>>>>>>>> replace the ACITree and also encapsulate the new tree behavio= r on our tests >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Adds tests for all the tree functionalities >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 0002 patch: >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Extracts, refactors, adds tests and remove dependency from >>>>>>>>>>>>> ACI Tree on: >>>>>>>>>>>>> - getTreeNodeHierarchy >>>>>>>>>>>>> - on backup.js: menu_enabled, menu_enabled_server, >>>>>>>>>>>>> start_backup_global_server, backup_objects >>>>>>>>>>>>> - on datagrid.js: show_data_grid, get_panel_title, >>>>>>>>>>>>> show_query_tool >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Start using sprintf-js as Underscore.String is deprecating >>>>>>>>>>>>> sprintf function >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> This patch represents only 10 calls to ACITree.itemData out o= f >>>>>>>>>>>>> 176 that are spread around our code >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *In Depth look on the process behind the patch:* >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> We started writing this patch with the idea that we need to >>>>>>>>>>>>> decouple pgAdmin4 from ACITree, because ACITree is no longer = supported, the >>>>>>>>>>>>> documentation is non existent and ACITree is no longer being = actively >>>>>>>>>>>>> developed. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Our process: >>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. We "randomly" selected a function that is part of the >>>>>>>>>>>>> ACITree. From this point we decided to replace that function = with our own >>>>>>>>>>>>> version. The function that we choose was "itemData". >>>>>>>>>>>>> The function gives us all the "data" that a specific node of >>>>>>>>>>>>> the tree find. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Given in order to replace the tree we would need to have a >>>>>>>>>>>>> function that would give us the same information. We had 2 op= tions: >>>>>>>>>>>>> a) Create a tree with a function called itemData >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pros: >>>>>>>>>>>>> - At first view this was the simpler solution >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Would keep the status quo >>>>>>>>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Not a OOP approach >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Not very flexible >>>>>>>>>>>>> b) Create a tree that would return a node given an ID and >>>>>>>>>>>>> then the node would be responsible for giving it's data. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Pros: >>>>>>>>>>>>> - OOP Approach >>>>>>>>>>>>> - More flexible and we do not need to bring the tree around, >>>>>>>>>>>>> just a node >>>>>>>>>>>>> Cons: >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Break the current status quo >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Given these 2 options we decided to go for a more OOP approac= h >>>>>>>>>>>>> creating a Tree and a TreeNode classes, that in the future wi= ll be renamed >>>>>>>>>>>>> to ACITreeWrapper and TreeNode. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. After we decided on the starting point we searched for >>>>>>>>>>>>> occurrences of the function "itemData" and we found out that = there were 303 >>>>>>>>>>>>> occurrences of "itemData" in the code and roughly 176 calls t= o the function >>>>>>>>>>>>> itself (some of the hits were variable names). >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. We selected the first file on the search and found the >>>>>>>>>>>>> function that was responsible for calling the itemData functi= on. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Extracted the function to a separate file >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Wrap this function with tests >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. Refactor the function to ES6, give more declarative names >>>>>>>>>>>>> to variables and break the functions into smaller chunks >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 7. When all the tests were passing we replaced ACITree with >>>>>>>>>>>>> our Tree >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 8. We ensured that all tests were passing >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 9. Remove function from the original file and use the new >>>>>>>>>>>>> function >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 10. Ensure everything still works >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 11. Find the next function and execute from step 4 until all >>>>>>>>>>>>> the functions are replaced, refactored and tested. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> As you can see by the process this is a pretty huge undertake= , >>>>>>>>>>>>> because of the number of calls to the function. This is just = the first step >>>>>>>>>>>>> on the direction of completely isolating the ACITree so that = we can solve >>>>>>>>>>>>> the problem with a large number of elements on the tree. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> *What is on our radar that we need to address:* >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Finish the complete decoupling of the ACITree >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Performance of the current tree implementation >>>>>>>>>>>>> - Tweak the naming of the Tree class to explicitly tell us >>>>>>>>>>>>> this is to use only with ACITree. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks >>>>>>>>>>>>> Joao >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dave Page >>>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com >>>> Twitter: @pgsnake >>>> >>>> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com >>>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Dave Page >>> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com >>> Twitter: @pgsnake >>> >>> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com >>> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company >>> >> --000000000000c8ddca056b121fb7 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<= div style=3D"margin:0pt 0pt 8px">On Sat, Apr 28, 2018 at 3:55 AM, Joao De A= lmeida Pereira <jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wro= te:
Hi Hackers,
As you are aware we kep= t on working on the patch, so we are attaching to this email a new version = of the patch.
This new version contains all the changes in the previous = one plus more extractions of functions and refactoring of code.

The = objective of this patch is to create a separation between pgAdmin and the A= CI Tree. We are doing this because we realized that at this point in time w= e have the ACI Tree all over the code of pgAdmin. I found a very interestin= g article that really talks about this: http= s://medium.freecodecamp.org/code-dependencies-are-the-devil-35ed2= 8b556d

= In this patch there are some visions and ideas about the location of the co= de, the way to organize it and also try to pave the future for a applicatio= n that is stable, easy to develop on and that can be release at a times not= ice.

We are investing a big chunk of our time in = doing this refactoring, but while doing that we also try to respond to the = patches sent to the mailing list. We would like the feedback from the commu= nity because we believe this is a changing point for the application. The i= dea is to change the way we develop this application, instead of only corre= cting a bug of developing a feature, with every commit we should correct th= e bug or develop a feature but leave the code a little better than we found= it (Refactoring, refactoring, refactoring). This is hard work but that is = what the users from pgAdmin expect from this community of developers.
=


=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D

<= div>

It is a huge patch
=C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 86 files changed, 5492 inserts, 1840 deletions
and we = would like to get your feedback as soon as possible, because we are continu= ing to work on it which means it is going to grow in size.=C2=A0
=

At this point in time we still have 124 of 17= 6 calls to the function itemData from ACITree.

What does each patch = contain:
0001:
=C2=A0 Very simple patch, we found out that th= e linter was not looking into all the javascript test files, so this patch = will ensure it is
Committed the pa= tch along with the regression introduced because of this patch.=C2=A0
=

0002:
=C2=A0 New Tree abstraction. This patch contains the new Tree t= hat works as an adaptor for ACI Tree and is going to be used on all the ext= ractions that we are doing.

I was expecting a separate layer between the tree implementation, = and aciTree adaptor.
Please find the patch for the example.
=

It will separate the two layers, and easy to replace wi= th the new implemenation in future.=C2=A0

0003:
=C2= =A0 Code that extracts, wrap with tests and replace ACI Tree invocations.
There are many small cases left in = the patches.
Hence - I would like to know the TODO list created b= y you.

e.g. When we remove any of the object from = the database server, we're not yet removing the respective node from th= e new implementation, and its children.=C2=A0
=C2=A0
=C2=A0 We start cre= ating new pattern for the location of Javascript files and their structure.=
I would not like to see that chan= ges in this patch.
I would like us to come up with the actual des= ign about the hot pluggability before going in this direction.=C2=A0
<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px= #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
=C2=A0 Create= patterns for creation of dialogs (backup and restore)
It's better - we don't change the directory st= ructure at the moment.

I am not against dividing t= he big javascript files in small chunks, but - I would like us to discuss f= irst about the hot plugins design first.

-- Thanks= , Ashesh=C2=A0
=C2=A0
=C2=A0=C2=A0

Thanks
Joao
=


<= div class=3D"gmail_quote">
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:34 AM = Ashesh Vashi <ashesh.vashi@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
I have quite a few comments for t= he patch.
I will send them soon.=C2=A0

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018, 14:45 Dave Pa= ge <dpage@pgadmin= .org> wrote:
How is your work on this going Ashesh? Will you be committing today?

On Wed, Apr 25, = 2018 at 8:52 AM, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
Ashesh; you= had agreed to work on this early this week. Please ensure you do so today.=

Thanks.

On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 8:13 PM, Joao De= Almeida Pereira <jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.= io> wrote:
Hi Hackers,

Can someone review and merge this patch?

Thanks
Joao

On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:23 AM Joao De Almeida Pereira <<= a href=3D"mailto:jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D= "_blank">jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote:
Hi Hackers,
Any other comment about = this patch?

Thanks
Joao

On Tue, A= pr 10, 2018 at 12:00 PM Joao De Almeida Pereira <jdealmeidaper= eira@pivotal.io> wrote:
Hello Khushboo

<= div dir=3D"ltr">
On Mon, Apr 9, = 2018 at 1:59 AM Khushboo Vashi <khushboo.vashi@enterprisedb= .com> wrote:
Hi Jo= ao,

I have reviewed your patch and have some suggestions.

On Sat, Apr 7, 2018 at 12:43 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote= :

Hello Murtuz= a/Dave,
Yes now the extracted functions are spread into different files.= The intent would be to make the files as small as possible, and also to gr= oup and name them in a way that would be easy to understand what each file = is doing without the need of opening it.
As a example:
static/js/backup will contain all the backup related functionalit= y inside of this folder we can see the file:

me= nu_utils.js At this moment in time we decided to group all the funct= ions that are related to the menu, but we can split that also if we believe= it is easier to see.

It'= s really very good to see the separated code for backup module. As we have = done for backup, we would like do it for other PG utilities like restore, m= aintenance etc.
Considering this, we should separate the code in a way = that some of the common functionalities can be used for other modules=C2=A0= like menu (as you have mentioned above), dialogue factory etc.
Also, I= think these functionalities should be in their respective static folder in= stead of pgadmin/static.

About the location of the files. The m= ove of the files to pgadmin/static/js was made on purpose in order to clear= ly separate Javascript from python code.
The rational behind it w= as
- Create a clear separation between the backend and frontend
- Having Javascript code concentrated in a single place, hopefully= , will encourage to developers to look for a functionality, that is already= implemented in another modules, because they are right there. (When we sta= rted this journey we realized that the 'nodes' have a big groups of= code that could be shared, but because the Javascript is spread everywhere= it is much harder to look for it)


<= div>There are some drawbacks of this separation:
- When creating = a new module we will need to put the javascript in a separate location from= the backend code=C2=A0=C2=A0
=C2=A0
=C2=A0<= /div>

static/js/datagrid folder contains all the datagrid related functionality

Same as backup module,=C2=A0 this should b= e in it's respective static/js folder.

Inside of the folder we can s= ee the files:
get_panel_title.js is responsible = for retrieving the name of the panel
show_data.js is responsible for showing the datagrid
show_query_to= ol.js is responsible for showing the query tool

Does this structure make sense?
Can yo= u give an example of a comment that you think is missing and that could hel= p?

As a personal note, unless the algorithm = is very obscure or very complicated, I believe that if the code needs comme= nts it is a signal that something needs to change in terms of naming, struc= ture of the part in question. This being said, I am open to add some commen= ts that might help people.

Y= ou are right, with the help of naming convention and structure of the code,= any one can get the idea about the code. But it is very useful to understa= nd the code=C2=A0
very easily with the proper comments especially= when there are multiple developers working on a single project.
=
I found some of the places where it would be great to have c= omments.

- treeMenu: new tree.Tree()=C2=A0 in a br= owser.js
- tree.js=C2=A0 (especially Tree class)
About the comment point I need a more clear understanding on what kin= d of comments you are looking for. Because when you read the function names= you understand the intent, what they are doing. The parameters also explai= n what you need to pass into them.

If what you are= looking for in these comments is the reasoning being the change itself, th= en that should be present in the commit message. Specially because this is = going to be a very big patch with a very big number of changes.
=

Thanks
Joao

=E2=80=8B

Thanks,
Khushboo=C2=A0
=
<= /div>
On Fri, Apr 6, 2018 at 4:48 AM= Murtuza Zabuawala <murtuza.zabuawala@enterprisedb.= com> wrote:
Hi Joao,

Patch looks good and working as expected.

I also agree with = Dave, Can we please add some comments in each file which can help us to und= erstand the flow, I'm saying because now the code is segregated in so m= any separate files it will be hard to keep track of the flow from one file = to another when debugging.


<= div dir=3D"ltr">
--
Regards,
Murtuza Zabuawala
Enterpris= eDB:=C2=A0http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterpr= ise PostgreSQL Company

=

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 7:08 PM, Joao De Alme= ida Pereira <jdealmeidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote:
Hi Khushboo,
Attached you can find both patches rebased<= /div>

Thanks


<= blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-l= eft:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Hi Joao,<= div>
Can you please rebase the second patch?

Thanks,
Khushboo


On Tue, Apr 3, 2018= at 12:15 AM, Joao De Almeida Pereira <jdeal= meidapereira@pivotal.io> wrote:
Hi Hackers,

Att= ached you can find the patch that will start to decouple pgAdmin from ACITr= ee library.
This patch is intended to be merged after 3.0, becaus= e we do not want to cause any entropy or delay the release, but we want to = start the discussion and show some code.

This job = that we started is a massive tech debt chore that will take some time to fi= nalize and we would love the help of the community to do it.

=
Summary of the patch:
0001 patch:=C2=A0
=C2=A0- Creates a new tree that will allow us to create a separation bet= ween the application and ACI Tree
=C2=A0- Creates a Fake Tree (Te= st double, for reference on the available test doubles:=C2=A0https://martinfowler.com/bliki/TestDouble.html) that can be= used to inplace to replace the ACITree and also encapsulate the new tree b= ehavior on our tests
=C2=A0- Adds tests for all the tree function= alities

0002 patch:
=C2=A0- Extracts, re= factors, adds tests and remove dependency from ACI Tree on:
- getTr= eeNodeHierarchy
- on backup.js: menu_enabled, menu_enabled_server, = start_backup_global_server, backup_objects
- on datagrid.js: show_da= ta_grid, get_panel_title, show_query_tool
- Start using sprintf-js as U= nderscore.String is deprecating sprintf function
=C2=A0=C2=A0
=
This patch represents only 10 calls to ACITree.itemData out of 176 tha= t are spread around our code


In Depth look on the process behind the patch:

=
We started writing this patch with the idea that we need to decouple p= gAdmin4 from ACITree, because ACITree is no longer supported, the documenta= tion is non existent and ACITree is no longer being actively developed.

Our process:
1. We "randomly" sel= ected a function that is part of the ACITree. From this point we decided to= replace that function with our own version. The function that we choose wa= s "itemData".
The function gives us all the "data&= quot; that a specific node of the tree find.
Given in order to re= place the tree we would need to have a function that would give us the same= information. We had 2 options:
=C2=A0 a) Create a tree with a fu= nction called itemData
Pros:
=C2=A0- At first view this= was the simpler solution
=C2=A0- Would keep the status quo
Cons:<= /div>
=C2=A0- Not a OOP approach
=C2=A0- Not very flexible
=C2=A0 b) Create a tree that would return a node given an ID and th= en the node would be responsible for giving it's data.
Pros:= =C2=A0
=C2=A0- OOP Approach
=C2=A0- More flexible and w= e do not need to bring the tree around, just a node
Cons:
=C2=A0- Break the current status quo

Given thes= e 2 options we decided to go for a more OOP approach creating a Tree and a = TreeNode classes, that in the future will be renamed to ACITreeWrapper and = TreeNode.

2. After we decided on the starting poin= t we searched for occurrences of the function "itemData" and we f= ound out that there were 303 occurrences of "itemData" in the cod= e and roughly 176 calls to the function itself (some of the hits were varia= ble names).

3. We selected the first file on the s= earch and found the function that was responsible for calling the itemData = function.

4. Extracted the function to a separate = file

5. Wrap this function with tests
6. Refactor the function to ES6, give more declarative names t= o variables and break the functions into smaller chunks

7. When all the tests were passing we replaced ACITree with our Tree<= /div>

8. We ensured that all tests were passing

9. Remove function from the original file and use the new = function

10. Ensure everything still works

11. Find the next function and execute from step 4 until = all the functions are replaced, refactored and tested.

=
As you can see by the process this is a pretty huge undertake, because= of the number of calls to the function. This is just the first step on the= direction of completely isolating the ACITree so that we can solve the pro= blem with a large number of elements on the tree.

= What is on our radar that we need to address:
=C2=A0- Fini= sh the complete decoupling of the ACITree
=C2=A0- Performance of = the current tree implementation
=C2=A0- Tweak the naming of the T= ree class to explicitly tell us this is to use only with ACITree.


Thanks
Joao






<= /div>--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.comTwitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb= .com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company



--
Dave Page
Blog: http://p= gsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake

EnterpriseDB UK: http= ://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

--000000000000c8ddca056b121fb7--