3 ms·

I honestly can't recall any piece of open source software being disparaged this badly on HN. People here are not given to panning such work, yet here we see ve

I honestly can't recall any piece of open source software being disparaged this badly on HN. People here are not given to panning such work, yet here we see very little restraint in the criticism. pgadmin 4 must really have some problems. I've never tried it; I could tell from the requirements and the "deployment" instructions that I wanted nothing to do with it. Guess I saved myself some grief. edit: looking back a bit I find this[1] "Ask HN": "The problem with pgAdmin 4 is that it is garbage" And no one contradicts this claim. To my mind this situation indicates severe dysfunction in the PostgresQL community. All indications are that pgadmin 4 has been failing hard for at least a year now, and worse, whomever is responsible for this appears oblivious. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14180966 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14180966

justintocci 9y ago
Yes! Thank you thank you thank you!!! I wish I could have said this myself. I feel there is a strong desire to get these issues out in the open and deal with this situation. Sadly, no moves are being made by those capable of doing so. If I can help in any way I would gladly do so.
- topspin 9y ago
  I believe you are doing precisely the best possible thing; provide a good alternative. A good alternative obviates all the excuses.
epoch1970 9y ago
"Failing hard" and "severe dysfunction" probably aren't the most realistic ways of describing it. The situation isn't good, but it also isn't bad enough for terms such as those to apply. While it isn't exactly a pleasant tool to use, it's not like it's totally broken either. I've used other similar software that was much worse to use than pgAdmin 4 is. It's slightly better than pgAdmin 3 in some ways, but it's also worse in other ways. Overall, it's mediocre. That might be the underlying problem: it doesn't live up to the high expectations that the rest of the PostgreSQL ecosystem tends to set. If I had to give it a grade, I'd say it's a B- or a C+. It could be a lot worse, but it could also be a lot better.
- ljw1001 9y ago
  I think "failing hard" is reasonable considering how much worse it is than the workhorse v3 that it replaces. I don't find it anything like "mediocre". It is the buggiest software I use regularly and has made doing simple things with Postgres harder and significantly more time consuming.
- chinhodado 9y ago
  It IS worse than pgAdmin 3 in every possible way I can think of. It is slow, clunky and bug-ridden. Is freezes and crashes all the time. It lacks tons of features already available in pgAdmin 3. It doesn't bring anything new to the table other than being rewritten as a webapp.

justintocci 9y ago

Yes! Thank you thank you thank you!!! I wish I could have said this myself. I feel there is a strong desire to get these issues out in the open and deal with this situation. Sadly, no moves are being made by those capable of doing so. If I can help in any way I would gladly do so.

topspin 9y ago
I believe you are doing precisely the best possible thing; provide a good alternative. A good alternative obviates all the excuses.

epoch1970 9y ago

"Failing hard" and "severe dysfunction" probably aren't the most realistic ways of describing it. The situation isn't good, but it also isn't bad enough for terms such as those to apply. While it isn't exactly a pleasant tool to use, it's not like it's totally broken either. I've used other similar software that was much worse to use than pgAdmin 4 is. It's slightly better than pgAdmin 3 in some ways, but it's also worse in other ways. Overall, it's mediocre. That might be the underlying problem: it doesn't live up to the high expectations that the rest of the PostgreSQL ecosystem tends to set. If I had to give it a grade, I'd say it's a B- or a C+. It could be a lot worse, but it could also be a lot better.

ljw1001 9y ago
I think "failing hard" is reasonable considering how much worse it is than the workhorse v3 that it replaces. I don't find it anything like "mediocre". It is the buggiest software I use regularly and has made doing simple things with Postgres harder and significantly more time consuming.
chinhodado 9y ago
It IS worse than pgAdmin 3 in every possible way I can think of. It is slow, clunky and bug-ridden. Is freezes and crashes all the time. It lacks tons of features already available in pgAdmin 3. It doesn't bring anything new to the table other than being rewritten as a webapp.