Hi On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:18 PM, George Gelashvili <ggelashv...@pivotal.io> wrote: > Hi Dave, > > We looked through the places where there is existing version checking and > there isn't a ton of it.
That's because we went to great lengths to minimise it in pgAdmin 4. It's mostly confined to template selection for SQL now. > Our current plan for supporting Greenplum in > pgAdmin4 was not necessarily to support all the features of pgAdmin4, but to > at least get the core functionality working. > I'm not too concerned about there being a ton of switches, because I don't > think most features will need to be disabled. We will also likely make > changes to Greenplum to support certain features like query plans rather > than doing all the changes on the pgAdmin4 side. OK. From my perspective though, I have to ensure that what we offer in the community is a good experience. If it's not appropriate or necessary to support a feature in GP, that's fine - but it needs to be disabled to prevent users reporting bugs to us > What I would like to see though is version checking that happens in one > place and is not tied exclusively to either flavor or version, but to a > combination of the two. E.g. Greenplum 5.0 might support a feature that is > not supported in 8.3 postgres. Can you do a rough assessment of how many 'features' we'd be likely to need to have the PG driver advertise? That would give a better idea of the extent of the work involved. In principal I'm not against the idea of having a function in each driver that allows us to check for the presence of a given feature, including by-version as required. What I'm against is that becoming a mess of spaghetti... -- Dave Page Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com Twitter: @pgsnake EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgadmin-hackers mailing list (pgadmin-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgadmin-hackers
