Re: Query tool data grid - Infinite scroll vs Pagination

Hi Hackers,

I have come up with the following design, which allows:

1. Adjust the range of rows visible, aka Window.

2. Jump to a page number directly based on rows window size.

3. Pagination buttons to move forward and backward.

My question is, how should "select all" behave now? Previously we used to
fetch all the rows when select all was clicked which actually slowed down
as it took time for large data.

Maybe add a new button to virtually "Select All Rows".

[image: image (15).png]

On Tue, Jul 2, 2024 at 6:16 PM Aditya Toshniwal <
aditya(dot)toshniwal(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:

> Thank you Dave and others for your valuable feedback.
> We'll try to achieve what is best for the users.
>
> On Tue, Jul 2, 2024 at 5:46 PM Dave Caughey <caugheyd(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> I think there's a nice blend between pagination and infinite scrolling.
>>
>> The problem with the *current *infinite scrolling implementation is that
>> the scroll baris scaled to the number of *rendered* rows, so as you scroll
>> down (which renders another bunch of records), it keeps rescaling the
>> scrollbar, so to get the next "page", you have to continually move to the
>> scrollbar (as Aditya says, "*Many users who want access in between rows
>> or last row struggle to do it as the user has to scroll and scroll.*")
>>
>> If instead the scrollbar were scaled to the total number of rows, (e.g.,
>> 1000 rather than the initial 25 rows that were rendered), then clicking
>> (say) in the lower third of the scrollbar would would do enough
>> fetching/rendering to display rows 601-625 (or such). Problem solved.
>>
>> Alternatively (or additionally), provide a "jump to row..." button
>> (similar to what Usman is suggesting re pagination) that gives the user
>> control to see a specific bunch of records quickly.
>>
>> But if the issue is that people don't like infinite scrolling because
>> "the user has to scroll and scroll", then fix that specific UE issue, and
>> people will be happy.
>>
>> The concern I have with a paginated solution is if the page represents
>> the maximum number of rows rendered in the results pane, at any one time.
>> Assume I can see 25 rows in the result pane. I.e., you show rows 1-25 for
>> the first page, then you *only *show rows 26-50 for the second page,
>> then *only *show rows 27-50, etc. But when there is a cluster of records
>> of interest between rows 640 and 655, then those records of interest are
>> going to be spread between pages 25 and 26, and will constantly require
>> flipping back and forth between pages. This would be possibly worse UE
>> than the current "user has to scroll and scroll" issue. On the other hand,
>> if your pagination solution includes letting someone nudge the rendered
>> rows up or down a bit so that I can see rows 640-655 all at once (e.g.,
>> there's a field where I can type in that the current page should start at
>> row 635, so I can see rows 640-655 all together), then I'm fine with that.
>>
>> However, if ultimately you decide to toss out infinite scrolling for
>> pagination, then please make the (default?) page size be the number of rows
>> you can actually see in the result pane, rather than some arbitrary number
>> (e.g., 50). Having the page size equal to the number of rendered rows
>> means I can quickly step through the pages and hopefully notice a record of
>> interest.... If the page size is larger than the number of rendered rows,
>> then as I step to the next page I *still *have to scroll down to see the
>> last few rows, then step to the next page, then scroll down again, I.e.,
>> that would be hideous UE!
>>
>> So my vote preferences are:
>>
>> First choice: keep infinite scrolling, but simply fix the scrollbar
>> scaling and/or give the user the means to quickly jump down by a page or to
>> a specific page
>> Second choice: use pagination, but *only *if there's the ability to see
>> a specific chunk of records on a single page (rather than spread across
>> two), and make the pagination size default to the number of records visible
>> given the height of the result pane
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Dave
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 1 Jul 2024 at 04:35, Usman Khan <umk555(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Aditya
>>> I vote for pagination, it would really be helpful for end users.
>>> In addition to giving the user the ability to set page size, if he can
>>> also select or enter what page he can jump to say 501, 990 etc it would be
>>> helpful.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 3:44 PM Aditya Toshniwal <
>>> aditya(dot)toshniwal(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, there were only 3 responses to this.
>>>> In that case, we will discuss internally and decide what to do.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 2:46 PM Aditya Toshniwal <
>>>> aditya(dot)toshniwal(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>>>
>>>>> Request you to share your opinion on this and respond on:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdfJhNK8qXSe9mKcubZa8jjjYl0hiZVxhv6GGJo8WJcYc27ug/viewform?usp=sharing
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 1:36 PM Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 at 13:42, Aditya Toshniwal <
>>>>>> aditya(dot)toshniwal(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Hackers,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Query tool data grid currently pulls the data on load basis in
>>>>>>> batches. For example, it will initially load only 1000 rows and once a user
>>>>>>> scrolls to the 1000th row, it will fetch the next batch of 1000.
>>>>>>> Many users who want access in between rows or last row struggle to
>>>>>>> do it as the user has to scroll and scroll. If someone grabs the scroller
>>>>>>> and pulls it down still it will be a good UX and the scrollbar may jump.
>>>>>>> One reported here -
>>>>>>> https://github.com/pgadmin-org/pgadmin4/issues/1780
>>>>>>> One more aspect to this is the in memory data of the query tool
>>>>>>> which keep on increasing on each scroll, it affects the performance.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I propose we should use pagination instead of infinite scroll with
>>>>>>> the following advantages:
>>>>>>> 1. Users can jump to any page they want.
>>>>>>> 2. Users can change the page size on the grid directly.
>>>>>>> 3. Memory will be used only for visible rows so performance
>>>>>>> improvement.
>>>>>>> 4. Predictable UI, no jumping scrollbars.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let me know what you think.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think there are definite benefits, but there is the downside of
>>>>>> having to scroll and click to browse results. Personally I'm fine with
>>>>>> that, but I think you should probably poll pgadmin-support for opinions
>>>>>> from more users.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Dave Page
>>>>>> pgAdmin: https://www.pgadmin.org
>>>>>> PostgreSQL: https://www.postgresql.org
>>>>>> EDB: https://www.enterprisedb.com
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Aditya Toshniwal
>>>>> pgAdmin Hacker | Sr. Software Architect | *enterprisedb.com*
>>>>> <https://www.enterprisedb.com/>
>>>>> "Don't Complain about Heat, Plant a TREE"
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Aditya Toshniwal
>>>> pgAdmin Hacker | Sr. Software Architect | *enterprisedb.com*
>>>> <https://www.enterprisedb.com/>
>>>> "Don't Complain about Heat, Plant a TREE"
>>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Aditya Toshniwal
> pgAdmin Hacker | Sr. Software Architect | *enterprisedb.com*
> <https://www.enterprisedb.com/>
> "Don't Complain about Heat, Plant a TREE"
>

--
Thanks,
Aditya Toshniwal
pgAdmin Hacker | Sr. Software Architect | *enterprisedb.com*
<https://www.enterprisedb.com/>
"Don't Complain about Heat, Plant a TREE"