Skip to content

Fixed an issue where pgAdmin failed to update the server connection s… #8852

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

adityatoshniwal
Copy link
Contributor

…tatus when the server was disconnected in the background and a refresh was performed on that server. #8149

…tatus when the server was disconnected in the background and a refresh was performed on that server. pgadmin-org#8149
// If the node is not a collection node, we need to fetch its data
// from the server and update the tree node.
try {
const url = nodeObj.generate_url(nodeItem, 'nodes', itemNodeData, true);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The backend call should be handled via tree_nodes.ts, and to achieve that, we may need to change the aspen tree refresh call itself. As per our current logic, only children get refreshed on refresh.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think then there is inconsistency at a lot of places. Similar calls are done everywhere in browser.js for tree related stuff. I referred the existing code.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If that is the case, we should eliminate that code, too, if possible.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@adityatoshniwal adityatoshniwal Jun 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I cannot do that in this PR. Removing them will require complete tree revamp and I'm facing difficulty to understand that code.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That change doesn't require in this PR, just this PR related change would be sufficient.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The current changes are PR related only.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants