pg.ddx.io pgsql-interfaces@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feedpgaccess - where to store the own data
17+ messages / 9 participants
[nested] [flat]
* pgaccess - where to store the own data
@ 2002-08-30 15:44 Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-08-30 15:51 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Iavor Raytchev @ 2002-08-30 15:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; pgsql-interfaces
Hello everybody,
There is an open question we need broad opinion on.
Currently pgaccess stores its own data in the database it works with.
Some people do not like that. To store it elsewhere invokes a number of
issues such as:
- where is this somewhere
- converting form all versions to the new
- etc.
What do people think about this. Is it so bad that the own data is
stored in the database pgaccess works with?
Iavor
--
www.pgaccess.org
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 15:44 pgaccess - where to store the own data Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
@ 2002-08-30 15:51 ` Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
2002-08-30 19:12 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
2002-08-31 12:38 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Joe Conway @ 2002-08-30 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; +Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; pgsql-interfaces
Iavor Raytchev wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> There is an open question we need broad opinion on.
>
> Currently pgaccess stores its own data in the database it works with.
> Some people do not like that. To store it elsewhere invokes a number of
> issues such as:
>
> - where is this somewhere
> - converting form all versions to the new
> - etc.
>
> What do people think about this. Is it so bad that the own data is
> stored in the database pgaccess works with?
>
I don't particularly like it. Oracle deals with this by having a
database unto itself as a management repository (Oracle Enterprise
Manager, OEM, I believe). You register the database you want to manage
with the repository, and the metadata is kept there instead of in each
managed database.
Joe
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 15:44 pgaccess - where to store the own data Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-08-30 15:51 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
@ 2002-08-30 19:12 ` terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: terry @ 2002-08-30 19:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-interfaces
>> Iavor Raytchev wrote:
>> > Hello everybody,
>> >
>> > There is an open question we need broad opinion on.
>> >
>> > Currently pgaccess stores its own data in the database it works
>> > with. Some people do not like that. To store it elsewhere invokes
>> > a number of issues such as:
>> >
>> > - where is this somewhere
>> > - converting form all versions to the new
>> > - etc.
>> >
>> > What do people think about this. Is it so bad that the own data
>> > is stored in the database pgaccess works with?
>>
>> I don't particularly like it. Oracle deals with this by having a
>> database unto itself as a management repository (Oracle Enterprise
>> Manager, OEM, I believe). You register the database you want to
>> manage with the repository, and the metadata is kept there instead
>> of in each managed database.
>> Joe
I would agree that pgaccess's metadata should not necessarily be stored
in with <all> of the rest of the data being used by a pgaccess
application. However, having a central repository as described above
may make it difficult to distribute an application without providing
some capabilities to distribute/manage a portion of the central
repository - which could be ugly for the developer and an end user.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 15:44 pgaccess - where to store the own data Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-08-30 15:51 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
@ 2002-08-31 12:38 ` Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
1 sibling, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Christopher Kings-Lynne @ 2002-08-31 12:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>; +Cc: Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; pgsql-interfaces
> > What do people think about this. Is it so bad that the own data is
> > stored in the database pgaccess works with?
> >
>
> I don't particularly like it. Oracle deals with this by having a
> database unto itself as a management repository (Oracle Enterprise
> Manager, OEM, I believe). You register the database you want to manage
> with the repository, and the metadata is kept there instead of in each
> managed database.
These days you could create a schema in the database you're managing as
well...
Chris
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data
@ 2002-08-30 15:50 Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
2002-08-30 17:59 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2002-08-30 15:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; pgsql-interfaces
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Iavor Raytchev [mailto:iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org]
> Sent: 30 August 2002 16:44
> To: pgsql-hackers; pgsql-interfaces
> Subject: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data
>
>
> Hello everybody,
>
> There is an open question we need broad opinion on.
>
> Currently pgaccess stores its own data in the database it
> works with. Some people do not like that. To store it
> elsewhere invokes a number of issues such as:
>
> - where is this somewhere
> - converting form all versions to the new
> - etc.
>
> What do people think about this. Is it so bad that the own
> data is stored in the database pgaccess works with?
I had the same trouble with pgAdmin, especially with pgAdmin I which had
a whole host of objects server-side. I also found that people didn't
like it, but where else do you store the data?
pgAdmin II no longer uses such tables, but to get over the problem as
best I could, I added a cleanup option to pgAdmin I that removed all
server side objects in one go.
Regards, Dave.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 15:50 Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
@ 2002-08-30 17:59 ` Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-08-30 18:12 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Matthew T. OConnor @ 2002-08-30 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>; +Cc: Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; pgsql-interfaces
> > What do people think about this. Is it so bad that the own
> > data is stored in the database pgaccess works with?
>
> pgAdmin II no longer uses such tables, but to get over the problem as
> best I could, I added a cleanup option to pgAdmin I that removed all
> server side objects in one go.
What does pgAdmin II do instead? Or, how did you solve the problem?
Also, just to put my two cents in, I and others I have worked with
don't like admin tools mucking up the databases we're working on. So, I
think it's a good idea to find some solution.
One thought is to use a completely separate database, but also allow it
to be stored in the current database if the user wants it too. This
also solves the case of a user that can't create a new database for his
admin tool (permissions etc...). Also, it might be cleaner now that we
have schemea support to create one pgadmin, or pgaccess schemea in the
database, that handled all the others.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 15:50 Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
2002-08-30 17:59 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
@ 2002-08-30 18:12 ` Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
2002-08-30 18:43 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Joe Conway @ 2002-08-30 18:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>; +Cc: Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>; Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; pgsql-interfaces
Matthew T. OConnor wrote:
> One thought is to use a completely separate database, but also allow it
> to be stored in the current database if the user wants it too. This
> also solves the case of a user that can't create a new database for his
> admin tool (permissions etc...). Also, it might be cleaner now that we
> have schemea support to create one pgadmin, or pgaccess schemea in the
> database, that handled all the others.
>
As someone else mentioned (I think), even using a separate schema is not
always an acceptable option. If you are using a "packaged" application
(whether commercial or open source), you usually don't want *any*
changes to the vendor provided database. Particularly with commercial
software, that can mean loss of, or problems with, technical support, or
problems when upgrading.
Joe
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 15:50 Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
2002-08-30 17:59 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-08-30 18:12 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
@ 2002-08-30 18:43 ` Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-09-04 15:19 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Matthew T. OConnor @ 2002-08-30 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>; +Cc: Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>; Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; pgsql-interfaces
> As someone else mentioned (I think), even using a separate schema is not
> always an acceptable option. If you are using a "packaged" application
> (whether commercial or open source), you usually don't want *any*
> changes to the vendor provided database. Particularly with commercial
> software, that can mean loss of, or problems with, technical support, or
> problems when upgrading.
Agreed, but if the information is to be stored using the database server at
all, then I think this option should be left in since some users probably
don't mind the clutter, and will not be allowed to create a new database or
schemea.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 15:50 Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
2002-08-30 17:59 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-08-30 18:12 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
2002-08-30 18:43 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
@ 2002-09-04 15:19 ` Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>
2002-09-04 16:24 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Ross J. Reedstrom @ 2002-09-04 15:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>; +Cc: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>; Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>; Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; pgsql-interfaces
On Fri, Aug 30, 2002 at 02:43:38PM -0400, Matthew T. OConnor wrote:
> > As someone else mentioned (I think), even using a separate schema is not
> > always an acceptable option. If you are using a "packaged" application
> > (whether commercial or open source), you usually don't want *any*
> > changes to the vendor provided database. Particularly with commercial
> > software, that can mean loss of, or problems with, technical support, or
> > problems when upgrading.
>
> Agreed, but if the information is to be stored using the database server at
> all, then I think this option should be left in since some users probably
> don't mind the clutter, and will not be allowed to create a new database or
> schemea.
I'm a bit late on this discussion, but I, for one, have liked having
some of the pgaccess info stored with the database. That way, no matter
what machine I connect to the DB from, I get the same set of functions,
queries, and schema-documents.
BTW, has the 'schema' tab been renamed yet? With actual schema in 7.3,
that'll get confusing.
Ross
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 15:50 Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
2002-08-30 17:59 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-08-30 18:12 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
2002-08-30 18:43 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-09-04 15:19 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>
@ 2002-09-04 16:24 ` Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-09-04 16:45 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Iavor Raytchev @ 2002-09-04 16:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>; +Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; pgsql-interfaces; pgaccess - developers <developers@pgaccess.org>
Ross wrote:
> I'm a bit late on this discussion, but I, for one, have liked
> having
> some of the pgaccess info stored with the database. That way,
> no matter
> what machine I connect to the DB from, I get the same set of
> functions,
> queries, and schema-documents.
Very much true.
A wiki page has been started on that topic - feel free to contribute to
the methods and their pros and cons, as well to the proposed final
approach.
http://www.pgaccess.org/index.php?page=WhereToStoreThePgAccessOwnData
> BTW, has the 'schema' tab been renamed yet? With actual schema
> in 7.3,
> that'll get confusing.
Not renamed yet.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 15:50 Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
2002-08-30 17:59 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-08-30 18:12 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
2002-08-30 18:43 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-09-04 15:19 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>
2002-09-04 16:24 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
@ 2002-09-04 16:45 ` Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>
2002-09-04 16:57 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Brett Schwarz <brett_schwarz@yahoo.com>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Ross J. Reedstrom @ 2002-09-04 16:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; +Cc: pgsql-interfaces; pgaccess - developers <developers@pgaccess.org>
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 06:24:10PM +0200, Iavor Raytchev wrote:
> A wiki page has been started on that topic - feel free to contribute to
> the methods and their pros and cons, as well to the proposed final
> approach.
> http://www.pgaccess.org/index.php?page=WhereToStoreThePgAccessOwnData
I'll take a look.
> > BTW, has the 'schema' tab been renamed yet? With actual schema
> > in 7.3, that'll get confusing.
> Not renamed yet.
In which case, we need to come up with a different name. How does
"diagrams" strike you all?
Ross (I removed HACKERS from the CC)
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 15:50 Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
2002-08-30 17:59 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-08-30 18:12 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
2002-08-30 18:43 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-09-04 15:19 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>
2002-09-04 16:24 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-09-04 16:45 ` Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>
@ 2002-09-04 16:57 ` Brett Schwarz <brett_schwarz@yahoo.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Brett Schwarz @ 2002-09-04 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>; +Cc: pgsql-interfaces; pgaccess - developers <developers@pgaccess.org>
Diagrams makes sense to me...
On Wed, 2002-09-04 at 09:45, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 06:24:10PM +0200, Iavor Raytchev wrote:
>
> > A wiki page has been started on that topic - feel free to contribute to
> > the methods and their pros and cons, as well to the proposed final
> > approach.
>
> > http://www.pgaccess.org/index.php?page=WhereToStoreThePgAccessOwnData
>
> I'll take a look.
>
> > > BTW, has the 'schema' tab been renamed yet? With actual schema
> > > in 7.3, that'll get confusing.
>
> > Not renamed yet.
>
> In which case, we need to come up with a different name. How does
> "diagrams" strike you all?
>
> Ross (I removed HACKERS from the CC)
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
> subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your
> message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
--
Brett Schwarz
brett_schwarz AT yahoo.com
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data
@ 2002-08-30 15:58 Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
2002-09-03 13:54 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2002-08-30 15:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>; Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; +Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; pgsql-interfaces
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Conway [mailto:mail@joeconway.com]
> Sent: 30 August 2002 16:52
> To: Iavor Raytchev
> Cc: pgsql-hackers; pgsql-interfaces
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] [INTERFACES] pgaccess - where to store
> the own data
>
>
> Iavor Raytchev wrote:
> > Hello everybody,
> >
> > There is an open question we need broad opinion on.
> >
> > Currently pgaccess stores its own data in the database it
> works with.
> > Some people do not like that. To store it elsewhere invokes
> a number
> > of issues such as:
> >
> > - where is this somewhere
> > - converting form all versions to the new
> > - etc.
> >
> > What do people think about this. Is it so bad that the own data is
> > stored in the database pgaccess works with?
> >
>
> I don't particularly like it. Oracle deals with this by having a
> database unto itself as a management repository (Oracle Enterprise
> Manager, OEM, I believe). You register the database you want
> to manage
> with the repository, and the metadata is kept there instead
> of in each
> managed database.
I thought of using that approach with pgAdmin, but how do you ensure
that new users use the correct database as the repository, or, if you
hard coded it to use a 'pgaccess' database (for example), how do you
deal with security etc on a shared system such as might be run by an
isp?
Of course, in 7.3 you could just create a pgaccess schema in each
database...
Regards, Dave.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 15:58 Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
@ 2002-09-03 13:54 ` terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: terry @ 2002-09-03 13:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-interfaces
>> how do you deal with security etc on a shared system such as might
>> be run by an isp?
Hmmm. Does this indicate that pgaccess maybe needs to be forked into a
true admin tool and a true end-user/application developer tool?
>> Of course, in 7.3 you could just create a pgaccess schema in each
>> database...
That sounds good, but I'ld still like the ability to access tables from
multiple databases too.
terry
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data
@ 2002-08-30 19:18 terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
2002-08-30 16:57 ` Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data John L. Turner <jlt@wvinter.net>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 17+ messages in thread
From: terry @ 2002-08-30 19:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-interfaces
>> Iavor Raytchev wrote:
>> > Hello everybody,
>> >
>> > There is an open question we need broad opinion on.
>> >
>> > Currently pgaccess stores its own data in the database it works
>> > with. Some people do not like that. To store it elsewhere invokes
>> > a number of issues such as:
>> >
>> > - where is this somewhere
>> > - converting form all versions to the new
>> > - etc.
>> >
>> > What do people think about this. Is it so bad that the own data
>> > is stored in the database pgaccess works with?
>>
>> I don't particularly like it. Oracle deals with this by having a
>> database unto itself as a management repository (Oracle Enterprise
>> Manager, OEM, I believe). You register the database you want to
>> manage with the repository, and the metadata is kept there instead
>> of in each managed database.
>>
>> Joe
I would agree that pgaccess's metadata should not necessarily be stored
in with <all> of the rest of the data being used by a pgaccess
application. However, having a central repository as described above
may make it difficult to distribute an application without providing
some capabilities to distribute/manage a portion of the central
repository - which could be ugly for the developer and an end user.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data
2002-08-30 19:18 Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
@ 2002-08-30 16:57 ` John L. Turner <jlt@wvinter.net>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: John L. Turner @ 2002-08-30 16:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: terry <tg5027@citlink.net>; pgsql-interfaces
On Friday 30 August 2002 19:18, terry wrote:
> >> Iavor Raytchev wrote:
> >> > Hello everybody,
> >> >
> >> > There is an open question we need broad opinion on.
> >> >
> >> > Currently pgaccess stores its own data in the database it works
> >> > with. Some people do not like that. To store it elsewhere invokes
> >> > a number of issues such as:
> >> >
> >> > - where is this somewhere
> >> > - converting form all versions to the new
> >> > - etc.
> >> >
> >> > What do people think about this. Is it so bad that the own data
> >> > is stored in the database pgaccess works with?
> >>
> >> I don't particularly like it. Oracle deals with this by having a
> >> database unto itself as a management repository (Oracle Enterprise
> >> Manager, OEM, I believe). You register the database you want to
> >> manage with the repository, and the metadata is kept there instead
> >> of in each managed database.
> >>
> >> Joe
>
> I would agree that pgaccess's metadata should not necessarily be stored
> in with <all> of the rest of the data being used by a pgaccess
> application. However, having a central repository as described above
> may make it difficult to distribute an application without providing
> some capabilities to distribute/manage a portion of the central
> repository - which could be ugly for the developer and an end user.
>
> From my experiences using m$access to augment existing applications, I
> would think that at least two sets of data would need to be handled by
> pgaccess - some in an existing database, and some in the pgaccess
> application. Hence, the structure of m$access with it's 'linked' and
> local tables in the application database itself. For self-contained
> applications, no linked tables would be used, and the existing format
> is fine for distributing an application. But, a major strength of
> m$access is it's ability to use data from multiple sources (databases),
> while the application database uses them transparently.
>
> In any case, where there are multiple users (say > 3 people) the data
> is usually separated from the application metadata anyway for
> maintenance purposes. That way it is not necessary to do live changes
> or to pass large data laden databases about for an application
> modification.
>
> Hence, I would vote to retain the existing method, and put the effort
> into the ability to open multiple 'other' databases on a table by table
> basis.
>
> Regards,
>
> terry
===============
Well, I thought I was the only one that want to do that.
Please give this "linking" serious consideration. Maybe even the postgresQL
folks can help in this area.
I have used it in MS Access for 9 years, and it does work well.
Where there is a will, there is a way !
--
John Turner
JCI Inc.
http://home.ntelos.net/~JLT
"Just because you do not know the answer
does not mean that someone else does"
Stephen J. Gould, {rip}
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
* Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data
@ 2002-08-30 20:02 Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 17+ messages in thread
From: Dave Page @ 2002-08-30 20:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>; +Cc: Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>; pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; pgsql-interfaces
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matthew T. OConnor [mailto:matthew@zeut.net]
> Sent: 30 August 2002 18:59
> To: Dave Page
> Cc: Iavor Raytchev; pgsql-hackers; pgsql-interfaces
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data
>
>
> > > What do people think about this. Is it so bad that the own
> > > data is stored in the database pgaccess works with?
> >
> > pgAdmin II no longer uses such tables, but to get over the
> problem as
> > best I could, I added a cleanup option to pgAdmin I that
> removed all
> > server side objects in one go.
>
> What does pgAdmin II do instead? Or, how did you solve the problem?
pgAdmin II 1.2.0 optionally used one table for it's revision control
feature. This has been removed in the latest code 'cos I was never
totally happy with it, and no-one admitted to using it when I quizzed
the lists.
The other objects (views, functions and tables) have been removed either
because pgAdmin II is far cleverer in the way it caches things than
pgAdmin I was and can get away with 2 queries instead of one or a more
complex one if required, or, because features such as monitoring of
sequence values and tables sizes were dropped in the great rewrite.
It's also worth noting, that pgAdmin and pgAccess have different aims.
Whilst pgAccess aims to provide application bulding and reporting
facilities (like Access) which naturally require a centralised data
store, pgAdmin is intended as a pure Admin tool aiming to fully support
all PostgreSQL object types.
Regards, Dave.
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 17+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2002-09-04 16:57 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2002-08-30 15:44 pgaccess - where to store the own data Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-08-30 15:51 ` Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
2002-08-30 19:12 ` terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
2002-08-31 12:38 ` Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl@familyhealth.com.au>
2002-08-30 15:50 Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
2002-08-30 17:59 ` Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-08-30 18:12 ` Joe Conway <mail@joeconway.com>
2002-08-30 18:43 ` Matthew T. OConnor <matthew@zeut.net>
2002-09-04 15:19 ` Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>
2002-09-04 16:24 ` Iavor Raytchev <iavor.raytchev@verysmall.org>
2002-09-04 16:45 ` Ross J. Reedstrom <reedstrm@rice.edu>
2002-09-04 16:57 ` Brett Schwarz <brett_schwarz@yahoo.com>
2002-08-30 15:58 Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
2002-09-03 13:54 ` terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
2002-08-30 19:18 Re: pgaccess - where to store the own data terry <tg5027@citlink.net>
2002-08-30 16:57 ` John L. Turner <jlt@wvinter.net>
2002-08-30 20:02 Re: [HACKERS] pgaccess - where to store the own data Dave Page <dpage@vale-housing.co.uk>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox