Re: Unified server/desktop config

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 1:47 PM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:

>
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 7:18 AM, Surinder Kumar <
> surinder(dot)kumar(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Hi
>>
>> On Ubuntu-14.04, I got error Application Server couldn't be contacted:
>>
>> *Steps performed:*
>>
>> - I have already installed pgAdmin4-1.4 which come with
>> PostgreSQL-9.6 installer.
>> then I run root(at)ubuntu:/opt/PostgreSQL/9.6/pgAdmin 4/bin# ./pgAdmin4./
>> .
>> - Now took latest git pull from HEAD
>> - Apply unified_config.diff patch.
>> - Then compiled pgAdmin4 in runtime and then run ./pgAdmin.
>> - Got error Application Server couldn't be contacted.
>>
>> But when I ran ./pgAdmin4 for the second time. pgAdmin4 runs without any
>> issue.
>> I didn’t get any error on the terminal and log file.
>> ​ I couldn't find why it gives this error.​
>>
>
> I know Fahar has run into this with existing releases on Ubuntu. If you
> enable debugging, can you see any clues? I assume it's going round the
> retry loop before aborting?
>
>> *Another issue related to Alembic:*
>>
>> If I am running pgAdmin4 already installed on my machine, then I upgrade
>> pgAdmin4 using Python wheel:
>>
>> (test_p27) surinder(at)ubuntu:~/virtualenvs/test_p27$ python
>> ~/virtualenvs/test_p27/lib/python2.7/site-packages/pgadmin4/pgAdmin4.py
>>
>> *I am getting error:*
>>
>> alembic.util.exc.CommandError: Can't locate revision identified by
>> 'd85a62333272'
>>
>> To fix this, I have to delete existing pgadmin4.db file. I don’t know if
>> it is a valid case or should I log an RM if it is?
>>
> That's an annoying side-effect of the move to Alembic. The previous DB
> code would quite happily (and intentionally) run with a newer version of
> the database, however, the new code does not. You'll see this issue
> whenever you've run a newer version of pgAdmin and then go back to an older
> version that uses an older schema version.
>
> It would be nice to change this so it doesn't complain - but we'd have to
> be cautious to only break compatibility on major releases.
>
>
>
>> Apart for this, I didn’t see any functionality break. It works!!
>> ​
>>
>> I liked the approach to set SEVER_MODE in runtime using built-ins.
>>
> Thanks. Do you think it warrants a 2.0 version number, given the potential
> for breaking existing installations (I do, but would like other feedback)?
> If we do that - and thus allow a parallel installation of 1.x and 2.x), how
> would we resolve the Alembic issue you noted such that both versions could
> be run against the same DB?
>
To resolve this issue while upgrading to newer version of pgAdmin4, we can
add a parameter version_table: 'alembic_version-1.6 in web/migrations/env.py
of upcoming pgAdmin4 source code(reference link
<https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/secure/attachment/51610/ASTERISK-24311-set-version-table.diff>
)
It will create a new version table in pgadmin4.db database and it will
instruct the Alembic to run migrations for the version stored in
table(alembic_version-1.6) when new pgAdmin4 will be installed.

I tried to check if it works or not. But somehow I couldn’t install
pgAdmin4-1.5 from wheel.

Alternatively I will try to generate new schema using in pgAdmin4 source
code(Git HEAD). It will generate a new migration version and then i will
run pgAdmin4-1.6 from wheel having different migration number. It will
create pgadmin4.db for 1.5.
Then
I will run pgAdmin4-1.6 from source code, so migration will take place and
hopefully
​the ​
sa
me
​ ​
pgadmin4.db will work for newer pgAdmin4 version.

Reference link <https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-24311>
where the same issue has been discussed.

Thanks,
Surinder

>
>
>> Thanks,
>> Surinder
>> ​
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 1:43 PM, Surinder Kumar <
>>> surinder(dot)kumar(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> The patch seems to work in Runtime mode, but fails in Server mode with
>>>> error:
>>>>
>>>> (pgAdmin_27)Laptop195:pgadmin4 surinder$ python web/pgAdmin4.py
>>>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>>> File "web/pgAdmin4.py", line 55, in <module>
>>>> exec(open(file_quote(setupfile), 'r').read())
>>>> File "<string>", line 35, in <module>
>>>> File "/Users/surinder/Documents/Projects/pgadmin4/web/pgadmin/setup/data_directory.py", line 23, in create_app_data_directory
>>>> _create_directory_if_not_exists(os.path.dirname(config.SQLITE_PATH))
>>>> File "/Users/surinder/Documents/Projects/pgadmin4/web/pgadmin/setup/data_directory.py", line 15, in _create_directory_if_not_exists
>>>> os.mkdir(_path)
>>>> OSError: [Errno 13] Permission denied: '/var/lib/pgadmin'
>>>> (pgAdmin_27)Laptop195:pgadmin4 surinder$
>>>>
>>>> This is because the directory /var/lib/ has root only access and I am
>>>> running pgAdmin4 with the non-root user.
>>>>
>>>> Also pgadmin directory is not created.
>>>>
>>>> (pgAdmin_35)Laptop195:pgadmin4 surinder$ ls /var/lib/pgadmin
>>>> ls: /var/lib/pgadmin: No such file or directory
>>>>
>>>> I got same error with MacOSX and Ubuntu-14.04 machines irrespective of
>>>> Python version.
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, I am testing patch with other test cases.
>>>>
>>> That's fully expected. In the case of Linux, the packages will be
>>> responsible for creating those directories with the appropriate ownership.
>>> In other cases, the user would.
>>>
>> ​ok, I got it.​
>>
>>>
>>> There's not really much we can do about that - and it's exactly what
>>> would happen if you try to run many other packages yourself when standard
>>> *nix paths are used.
>>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Surinder
>>>> ​
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Surinder Kumar <
>>>> surinder(dot)kumar(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 4:11 PM, Ashesh Vashi <
>>>>> ashesh(dot)vashi(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 7, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Anyone?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Surinder - please give this one priority.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Sure
>>>>> ​.​
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks & Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ashesh Vashi
>>>>>> EnterpriseDB INDIA: Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>>>>>> <http://www.enterprisedb.com/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *http://www.linkedin.com/in/asheshvashi*
>>>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/asheshvashi>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> All,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Attached is a patch that aims to allow us to have a standardised
>>>>>>>> config that will work out of the box for both web and desktop modes. It
>>>>>>>> does this by doing two things:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1) The runtime sets SERVER_MODE in the Python environment before
>>>>>>>> starting the app. If this value is set, then it overrides the default value
>>>>>>>> of SERVER_MODE in the config.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2) The config file then offers default values for the various file
>>>>>>>> locations for both server and desktop mode, setting them appropriately
>>>>>>>> based on the derived SERVER_MODE value.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The only downsides I can see from this are:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - You cannot run in server mode in the runtime without manually
>>>>>>>> reconfiguring SERVER_MODE and likely a bunch of paths in config_local.py
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> - If you want to override SERVER_MODE, you'll probably also need to
>>>>>>>> redefine the various paths in config_local.py.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't see either being something 99.9% of users would need though.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can anyone see if the patch breaks anything, or if I missed any
>>>>>>>> side effects?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is it likely to break things during upgrades? I suspect so... so
>>>>>>>> maybe this should prompt v2.0?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'd appreciate multiple reviews of this, as it could break things.
>>>>>>>> Note that I haven't yet updated the docs.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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
>
​