Re: Serious feedback and questions about the future of pgAdmin.

Hi

On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 5:52 PM, Shira Bezalel <shira(at)sfei(dot)org> wrote:
> Hi Dave.
>
> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 6:42 PM, Jack Royal-Gordon <jackrg(at)pobox(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > First, I appreciate your tone of constructive criticism — there has been
>> > way
>> > too much negative criticism on this topic. However, as another user who
>> > has
>> > his own experiences with pgAdmin4, I feel compelled to reply regarding
>> > some
>> > of your complaints — please see my comments below.
>>
>> +1. Thanks Jack.
>>
>> >
>> > I don’t doubt that you are experiencing this, but I do not experience
>> > increased sluggishness vs. pgAdmin III at all. The difference, I
>> > believe, is
>> > that I am running OS X on a Mac, instead of Windows 10. So this may be a
>> > program tuning problem regarding Windows 10, or it may just be that the
>> > browser rendering in Windows 10 is poor for what the developers are
>> > doing.
>> > Either way, this can be a clue as to how to address this issue.
>> >
>> > Question for the Developers: Are you all using Windows as your main
>> > testing
>> > platform, or are most of you users of other platforms? If you’re not
>> > using
>> > Windows, then that may account for the poor performance in Windows —
>> > since
>> > most “business” work is done on Windows, it behooves you to focus on
>> > Windows
>> > performance primarily (I say this even though I was thrilled to get off
>> > Windows for so many reasons).
>>
>> All of the EDB team use either Mac or Linux (on a VM on Mac)
>> primarily. I believe the Pivotal team are all Mac users as well.
>>
>> That said, I have been doing a fair bit of testing on Windows over the
>> last week - but have failed to reproduce the extremes of slowness I've
>> seen reported. For example, one user said he was using a modern quad
>> core machine with 16GB RAM and SSD disk, and saw 1 minute+ startup
>> times. I could only get close to this on a 10 year old Dell Optiplex
>> 740 with a dual core AMD CPU, 6GB RAM and a spinning disk where I was
>> seeing about 50 seconds to startup.
>>
>> On a 4GB, 2 core VM running on my Mac, I see ~20 seconds following a
>> couple of tweaks I committed over the weekend, and oddly on a quad
>> core i7 with 16GB and SSD, I'm seeing much the same startup time - so,
>> not as fast as it ideally should be, but also nothing like as slow as
>> some have reported.
>>
>> My testing so far is indicating that the slow part is QtWebEngine, the
>> embedded Qt browser that's used in the runtime. Google shows that
>> other users have also found this to be slow on Windows. Unfortunately
>> I've yet to find a better option to replace it. This has been bourn
>> out by other users who have reported much improved performance by
>> running the server from the command line and connecting with a
>> browser.
>>
>> That said, we're continuing to look at how performance there might be
>> improved, as well as in other areas; for example, we're working on
>> eliminating JS/CSS templates in the backend in favour of static files
>> (which Ashesh has almost finished). That will minimise the amount of
>> backend processing done when loading code. We'll also be webpacking
>> the JS/CSS code to massively reduce the number of round trips the
>> client makes to the server to load everything. This should also
>> eliminate the "first-click delay" seen when opening some treeview
>> nodes for the first time that occurs when it on-demand loads the
>> required code.
>>
>> So I guess my main question here is; what is different about the OPs
>> "*very* powerful and modern x86 workstation" that makes pgAdmin run so
>> slowly on it? My first guess is anti-virus software. My machines all
>> use Windows Defender, but perhaps something else is slowing down
>> things (pgAdmin does have a lot of files to access). Perhaps adding
>> the pgAdmin installation directory to the AV package's exclude list
>> would help.
>
>
>
> On my Win10 machine, I just disabled the anti-virus software then timed how
> long it took for pgAdmin 4 v1.5 to open when my machine was fairly idle.
>
> It took 33 seconds. Re-enabled AV and it took the same amount of time to
> open.
>
> Systems specs:
>
> Windows Version 10.0.14393 Build 14393
> 16.0 GB RAM with about 11 GB free at the time of launching pgAdmin 4
> Processor Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4790 CPU @ 3.60GHz, 3601 Mhz, 4 Core(s), 8
> Logical Processor(s)

That's pretty similar to one of my test boxes, and I get similar
results with 1.5GA.

> Let me know if there are other tests or information that would be helpful. I
> want to support the success of pgAdmin 4.

Thank you. We're working on a number of ideas at the moment, but if
you can keep an eye open for any "please test this build" emails to
the list, that would be most helpful.

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

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