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

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)

​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,​
Shira

> > I have this same problem with pgAdmin III. 4 would not connect with my
> local
> > server (where I have the empty password), so I cannot say if 4 has this
> > issue.
>
> I do not. pgAdmin 3 and 4 both remember my passwords just fine.
>
> > My experience with 4 is much better than 3 here. 3 did not ever remember
> any
> > context, so much so that if I had created a new server connection and
> got a
> > timeout error and the program died when I tried to reopen the connection,
> > the server would be lost and I would have to re-enter it’s properties
> > (unless I first closed out of 3). 4 seems to at least not have that
> problem.
> >
> >
> > While the fault for this probably lies in the Windows rendering engine,
> that
> > does impact the choice of a browser-based implementation. Can you try
> this
> > on a different browser, such as Firefox or Chrome (I don’t know if that’s
> > even possible)?
> >
> > On Jun 11, 2017, at 4:11 AM, <grekloedlc(at)tutanota(dot)com>
> > <grekloedlc(at)tutanota(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Dear pgAdmin developers,
> >
> >
> > When I first heard that you were doing a total rewrite of pgAdmin III, I
> was
> > extremely excited, because I had long been frustrated with the various
> > annoyances and bugs in that program, which I was (and am still, actually)
> > using daily, primarily how it always felt like a chore to start up and
> get
> > ready unless the server was physically located near me.
> >
> >
> > So when you eventually released the first public version of pgAdmin
> > generation 4, I very eagerly downloaded it and tried it out.
> Unfortunately,
> > to claim that I was "disappointed" isn't enough; I was frankly
> *appalled*. I
> > will list the reasons in a moment, but I'd first like to point out that
> > since then, I have repeatedly tried new versions of it, hoping to see
> > improvements, but unfortunately finding all the same issues still present
> > (as of v1.5, 2017-06-11, at the time of typing).
> >
> >
> > Here are the critical issues:
> >
> >
> > 1. Extreme sluggishness. Both the GUI itself, and the fetching of data
> from
> > the server, is so slow and flimsy as to drive me insane even efter using
> it
> > for less than a minute. I seriously get so angry that I kill the window
> in
> > disgust. I'm not trying to be insulting or overly dramatic; this is just
> a
> > fact. The software makes me angry due to how slow and unreliable it
> seems,
> > and how prone it is to freeze (although it recovers after a while). This
> is
> > on a *very* powerful and modern x86 workstation running a very "clean"
> > (relative) Windows 10. All other programs are responsive and fast, except
> > for pgAdmin 4. I really feel handicapped using it, in a way that's not at
> > all the case with the old pgAdmin III, although even that one has
> mysterious
> > fetch-delays that don't seem to correspond with the amount of data pulled
> > through the network (SSH tunnel)…
> >
> >
> > 2. It doesn't remember the empty password. It just keeps on asking, again
> > and again, for the nonexistent password, even though I've checked the
> box to
> > "remember" it a million times. This is infuriating to say the least.
> >
> >
> > 3. Even worse so than the old program, pgAdmin 4 also doesn't seem to
> > remember the "last state" at all, forcing me to slowly progress through
> the
> > tree hierarchy each time I start it, waiting seconds each time I click
> > anything. This makes me just let out a big sigh each time I have to
> manage
> > my databases in any way, including making simple queries in a graphical
> > environment. What should be instant becomes a huge chore. I cannot
> believe
> > that it doesn't remember the "state" of the collapsed objects until the
> next
> > time.
> >
> >
> > In order to say something positive, I do appreciate the
> cross-platformness
> > and apparently the ability for it to run in a browser, hosted on a
> server.
> > (Although I personally don't trust it or any other software to do that
> > safely.) Sadly, this has the serious downside of extremely poor
> performance,
> > at least on Windows, to the point of making it practically impossible to
> > use.
> >
> >
> > I don't wanna sound as if I'm just telling you what a terrible job you've
> > done. I realize that in spite of these serious flaws, a lot of work must
> > have been plowed into this project, and it's unlikely that my complaints
> > will really be taken to heart by the people who worked on it for so long,
> > and for free, only to then get "insulted". I feel genuinely sorry and
> > frustrated about the whole situation, and I'm now seriously wondering
> what
> > to do with my "computer life" as it is heavily dependent on PostgreSQL as
> > the basis. pgAdmin III is aging and pgAdmin 4 doesn't seem to be going
> > anywhere, or changing in any major ways from its current state.
> >
> >
> > What are the odds that you'll forget about pgAdmin 4 and instead go
> straight
> > for a "pgAdmin V", taking everything you've learned but improving on it
> > heavily? By the way, it is extremely common for developers to first do
> > something great, then try to improve it, but failing entirely, instead
> > producing a monster. For example: Winamp. There are many more cases, and
> it
> > seems to happen again and again. It even happened to me! I was super
> proud
> > of a product that was, to me, "vastly superior" to the old one, but the
> > users absolutely hated it, and eventually, I had to realize that while
> > technically better in some aspects, I had just done things "differently
> for
> > the sake of doing them differently". I hope you'll understand me and
> that I
> > really just want a great pgAdmin tool -- not to be mean.
> >
> >
> > If you have anything promising to tell me in regards to any of this, I'd
> > like to hear it. In the past, I've looked through the miserable
> > "alternatives", so it's probably pointless to tell me about any of those,
> > but if there is some sort of alternative that you know of, which is
> heavily
> > polished and maintained and trusted and free of charge, it would
> definitely
> > be interesting to me. However, I very much doubt that anything like that
> > exists, and I doubt that this is the best place to ask for that. In fact,
> > it's probably considered rude...
> >
> >
> > // A long-time pgAdmin user who'd hate to see this crucial tool go the
> same
> > way as so many other now-dead programs.
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Dave Page
> Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
> Twitter: @pgsnake
>
> EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgadmin-support mailing list (pgadmin-support(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-support
>

--
Shira Bezalel
Database Administrator & Desktop Support Manager
San Francisco Estuary Institute
www.sfei.org
Ph: 510-746-7304 <(510)%20746-7304>