7 May
2013
7 May
'13
8:19 p.m.
On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Marc Delisle <marc(a)infomarc.info> wrote:
> Regardless, the question at hand is whether this pull request can
be
https://github.com/phpmyadmin/phpmyadmin/pull/290#issuecomment-17281963
--
Marc Delisle
http://infomarc.info
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book
"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and
their applications. This 200-page book is written by three acclaimed
leaders in the field. The early access version is available now.
Download your free book today! http://p.sf.net/sfu/neotech_d2d_may
_______________________________________________
Phpmyadmin-devel mailing list
Phpmyadmin-devel(a)lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phpmyadmin-devel
Le 2013-05-06 09:46, Isaac Bennetch a écrit :
type,
this,
The more I think about it, the more I prefer to show a warning message. Not
showing all functions will likely confuse the user ("using table foo I see
MD5() and AES_ENCRYPT(), with table bar I only see NOW()" ) -- so I propose
that the appropriate way to resolve the situation is to always show all
available functions, but to add a popup warning that "The function you have
selected may not be compatible with the column type."
Doing so would require some method of mapping functions to compatible
column types, but that list shouldn't change much so I don't see a problem
with that.
What's everyone think? It seems to me the best of both worlds -- we're not
changing the user experience and we're not blindly inserting data we know
won't work.
On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 7:45 AM, Marc Delisle <marc(a)infomarc.info
<mailto:marc@infomarc.info>> wrote:
Le 2013-05-04 10:54, Isaac Bennetch a écrit :
user
Hi,
Can I get some thoughts on [1]? The way the code exists
currently, you
can insert bad data (you'll get a standard
MySQL warning after the
insert). For example, inserting the output of the MD5() function
in to a
TINYINT column. This pull request implements the
AES_ENCRYPT
function,
> but silently fails to show the salt form field in the event the > tries to insert to an invalid column
type...so it looks broken in
the
case the
user is trying to do something that's a bad idea.
In keeping with the current system, I thought it should always
show the
> salt field and proceed with the insert regardless of the column > however that isn't the most
user-friendly idea. To keep users most
> happy, I wondered if we should implement some sanity checks for
some
column
types and show an inline warning as needed (similar to the
recently merged warning when creating a new user with the same
username). Some of the functions require or suggest certain
column types
which we could easily check, but I'm not sure
it's phpMyAdmin's
responsibility to constantly warn the user in this case.
I added a comment in the pull request. I also asked Garvin about let's wait for his insight.
I got a reply from Garvin. He thinks that if the mapping between the
function list and the columns type is actively maintained, there is no
reason to show all possible functions in the drop-down.
merged
as-is or if we should change the behavior in the case of an
invalid column type.
If it works well for the correct column type, please merge.
My preference would be to change the behavior of the patch before
merging. I would prefer to see a small inline popup when attempting to
insert potentially invalid data, a second option I do not mind is simply
inserting the data and showing the MySQL warning about truncated data on
the results page (the current behavior for all functions except for this
patch). The least desirable behavior, which is implemented by this
patch, is to silently refuse to do anything on the insert page (in this
patch, AES_ENCRYPT requires a salt value which is prompted when
selecting the AES_ENCRYPT function; however if the column type is not
valid for AES_ENCRYPT data, the salt field silently fails to appear,
which I thought was a bug in the implementation).
I think for now I'll simply ask for the salt field to always appear
(matching current behavior), if we reach a decision about handling
known-invalid function/column combinations we can create a feature
request and move forward.
Thanks!
1 -