Hi Dave. On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, Dave Page <dp...@pgadmin.org> wrote:
> Hi > > On Sun, Jun 11, 2017 at 6:42 PM, Jack Royal-Gordon <jac...@pobox.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, <grekloe...@tutanota.com> > > <grekloe...@tutanota.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@postgresql.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>
