Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Original comment by stuart02
on 4 Mar 2009 at 9:28
Auto complete has been added to the Query Editor for field names and table
names.
I'd like to avoid going down the path of using a drill down - aka outline view
- for the table list.
I find all SQL dev tools that do this to be too messy or have ugly
implementation.
Original comment by avenja...@gmail.com
on 14 May 2009 at 3:53
Issue 344 has been merged into this issue.
Original comment by stuart02
on 16 Oct 2009 at 8:41
This continues to be my biggest frustration with Sequel Pro. I don't have all
my
tables and their fields memorized. Right now I have to open two sequel pro
windows
to see table structure in one and write my query in another. The Auto Complete
feature is unusable when you have lots of tables and lots of fields and it
doesn't
even work most of the time. I agree with the messy implementation that you
refer to
but there has to be some way that I can easily lookup table and field
information
from the query window.
Original comment by mike.farmer
on 17 Dec 2009 at 7:29
Mike Farmer + 1. I agree; I'd really like a visual representation of the schema
to assist in query writing. I don't
have my tables and columns memorized, and I'm constantly switching between tabs
to build queries. It's the
single feature I look for whenever I update.
The Auto-complete implementation requires that you know the first character,
and that you manually activate
it. If the implementation could be a bit smarter and more active, allow
activation with zero characters (to
prime it), and a different key combo (command + period - ESC requires a large
hand move), it might go a
long way.
And, to be clear, I'm not looking for an exhaustive description of the
structure. A simple table name, then
column name in a tree view would be brilliant. That's all you really need when
writing queries. Maybe a hover
state to describe the column properties, but that's all.
Original comment by matthew.schultz
on 18 Dec 2009 at 3:09
To see that is one Point but to get it complete it shoold be in a Form like
this:
>Table
<fieldname>(<fieldtype>)
To see whether i have to write "like" or "="...
Original comment by Arnold.S...@gmail.com
on 13 Feb 2010 at 2:12
The latest Sequel Pro nightly provides a new multi-mode narrow-down completion
(for MySQL >= 5.0 up to
now) which makes it much easier to write db/table/field names of the current
connection. In addition it shows
for fields the field type and encoding.
Furthermore it allows a fuzzy search completion CTRL+ESC, e.g. type "i_s.colu."
to see all fields from the
tables information_schema.COLUMNS and information.schema.COLUMN_PRIVILEDGES.
If one presses ⇧ while choosing the a suggestion it inserts the full path. A
documentation will follow soon.
--Hans
PS see attachments
Original comment by bibiko@gmail.com
on 13 Feb 2010 at 3:07
Attachments:
Since this thread shows that this topic is a matter of opinions, let me state
mine.
There is now Question about that the auto-completition feature isn't really
great.
It's a fact that working with data in a lot of tables with a lot of columns
(e.g. Wordpress with a few add-ons
on in my case test-data for my experiments) starts to suck and it get's even
worse considering joins between
two (and in my case not unusually more) tables.
It would be really helpful to get a view on the datastructure while writing
queries as seen in the attachement.
And even better getting the type of the column along.
If someone prefers not to have that feature then there may be a switch in the
prefs. Further I have to say that
this feature is very rare around the native mac os x mysql tools. So it would
also be an strategic asset to
establish a better position against competion on the market (even Sequel is
free you don't do it for your self,
but to bring a great peace of software to the people).
That's all I have to say regarding this topic.
Please keep up the good work.
Greeting from Germany,
Arnold
Original comment by Arnold.S...@gmail.com
on 14 Mar 2010 at 8:09
Attachments:
Hi Arnold,
only a tiny interposed question so far: Which auto-completion version do you
mean? Of 0.9.7 or of the nightly
builds (see here comment 7)? If you mean the auto-completion of the nightly
builds could you please
substantiate what's missing?
Regardless of the auto-completion we're thinking about that request intensely.
Kind regards,
--Hans
Original comment by bibiko@gmail.com
on 14 Mar 2010 at 8:44
Hi Hans,
I've been talking about the nightly builds. But regarding that question I
assume you misunderstood me.
I talked about the feature "auto-completion" by itself. Itself can only prevent
from typing much, but doesn't give
you some kind of overview of your possibilities to get to a specific target.
The feature itself in its type is not
comparable to the possibility to get a more detailed view of the tables while
actually writing a query. Also the
detailed view is more self-explanatory than learn substitutes like "i_s.colu"
and if I've learned something about
software it will be that you have to make it as easy to use as possible.
I hope you get my point, since it's kinda hard for me to express myself in
english. So please excuse my bad
english.
Greeting from Germany again,
Arnold
Original comment by Arnold.S...@gmail.com
on 14 Mar 2010 at 11:46
I'm a bit confused by your comment, too.
If you have a hard time writing English just write German, Hans and me both can
unterstand that :)
Are you looking for a tool that provides completion while writing a query when
you don't even know which
table/column you want to add?
Original comment by schlabbe...@gmail.com
on 16 Mar 2010 at 2:00
I think he means he wants a more visual list somewhere, rather than
autocompletion; while you can now type
"i_s." and hit autocomplete for a list of the columns, it still isn't as
obvious/visible as a separate structure list
somewhere?
Original comment by rowanb@gmail.com
on 16 Mar 2010 at 2:19
I've commented before, but I'd like to reiterate my support for this simple,
yet highly important feature. It's as
simple as the screenshot I've attached.
Replace the 'Table Information' (which I find superfluous), with the column
list. Simple. Effective. If you're
worried about mucking up the interface, simply provide the column meta info
(type, size, etc.) upon rollover.
Again, simple, effective.
I almost never use the auto-completion because I really do need the visual cue
of the column names. This is a
killer feature.
Original comment by muedot...@gmail.com
on 16 Mar 2010 at 2:49
Attachments:
Hi all,
@schlabberdog
If i would write in german, i can assume that 90% of everybody can't get my
point, so i think i just stick with english.
I think rowanb got the point. But it's not only about visibility and handling.
It's a feature to see even more then one table-
structure at the same time. So i have to disagree with matthewschultz001 about
the place where i would like that
information to see. Although i have to admit that i never ever looked at the
table-infomation there. So i kind of agree
that the given information there is a senseless use of space since the
information is redundant (information pane).
I think the table structure (and so the column meta-info within) should be
provided in the way shown in my screenshot
above.
In the end i want to say that i'm only explaining my wish for that feature
since i felt kind of asked for my humble opinion
by avenjamin saying he don't likes it.
So far...
Arnold
Original comment by Arnold.S...@gmail.com
on 16 Mar 2010 at 8:46
Agreed that the column names can also be a one-level deep tree structure, but
(if I properly recall), that was
shot down as being inelegant.
Original comment by muedot...@gmail.com
on 16 Mar 2010 at 8:54
Issue 279 has been merged into this issue.
Original comment by stuart02
on 17 Mar 2010 at 12:15
Quick mockup.
What about a menu item which lets you create as many info panels as you want
and you
can set them to show what you need while writing the query?
Original comment by schlabbe...@gmail.com
on 17 Mar 2010 at 1:28
Attachments:
Since a one-level deep tree structure is inelegant (which i can't see by
myself) i think schlabberdogs proposal
will satisfy my needs in functionality. Although i think the handling would be
as good as in a one-level deep tree
structure.
Even if there is now a proposal that will satisfy me i kinda feel like i have
to ask:
Why is a one-level deep tree structure inelegant?
Original comment by Arnold.S...@gmail.com
on 17 Mar 2010 at 11:40
Do I understand that "one-level deep tree structure" mean that the table list
would be an outline view, with
tables expandable to view their fields?
If so, I'd agree on the "inelegant" front - disclosure triangles next to every
table/view suddenly moves us away
from the "standard" OS X left-list which everyone is used to the appearance of,
and fields would probably have
to be non-selectable (or otherwise what would you show when a field was
selected?). It would achieve the aim
of displaying fields, but would compromise on the standard interface.
We've batted around a few ideas for this and will see what we can do once 0.9.8
is out of the door.
Original comment by rowanb@gmail.com
on 17 Mar 2010 at 12:44
I have to answer your first question with a straight "yes".
Now i think i get your point. There is now api for doing so. I've never did
something cocoa so i didn't know it. I
simply assumed it would be not a big deal because i've seen thinks like that
befor (screenshot given).
So i'm really looking forward for your ideas.
Original comment by Arnold.S...@gmail.com
on 17 Mar 2010 at 1:05
Attachments:
Oh there is an API - just compared to most apps with a sidebar, this is not a
usual use :)
Eg disk utility, Mail.app have expandable sidebars - but each item is
selectable. The fields would (I think) not be
selectable in Sequel Pro, which would seem wrong.
Original comment by rowanb@gmail.com
on 17 Mar 2010 at 1:35
But it could be (and be useful) by providing be additional information about a
column at the place shown in
matthewschultz001 screenshot.
Information like:
- is this column covered by an (primary)index (useful for joins)
- how big is the cardinality of the values in this column (useful but not easy to implement, may be
impossible)
- what is the length of the field (is it a varchar 3 oder 255?)
- what is the charset of the column (every column can have its own charset regardless of the tables charset)
- relations for this column (is there a foreign key contraint)
But i think they are really hard to gather.
Original comment by Arnold.S...@gmail.com
on 17 Mar 2010 at 2:04
I would suggest a usability improvement to auto-complete.
At present the biggest issue for me to using this is differentiating between
field and table names.
When the pop-up table listing all the possibilities names is displayed, a
helpful improvement would be if I can
either:
click on a small 'f' or 't' buttons, that are shown in a tiny menu bar,
to filter the list to display either fields or tables ( or even 'v' for views )
or
type cmd-f or cmd-t ( or other key combination ) that would then just list the
fields or tables.
Michael
Original comment by mjpta...@gmail.com
on 3 Apr 2010 at 5:01
auto_complet bug
if the full name of a table or field is key stroke enter do NOT pop up the
auto_complete box.
This interferes with editing. Once I have entered a field and I am hesitating
while I think of the next thing to
write
even though I have completely enter the field name and there are no other
matching field names that use the
entered text as a root for their name
ie ifI have fields name:
drug_name
drug_conc
If Ii enter "drug_" then the autocomplete should pop up
but if I enter "drug_name" it should NOT.
michael
Original comment by mjpta...@gmail.com
on 7 Apr 2010 at 8:18
Hi mjptango,
which version do you are using?
A couple of hours ago we improved the auto-complete behaviour. Thus if you
would like to try it please test the
latest nightly build.
Thanks,
--Hans
Original comment by bibiko@gmail.com
on 7 Apr 2010 at 8:34
r2124
auto-complete needs to be quieted down.
it now wishes to auto complete numbers spaces brackets,
a moments hesitation after typing ";" ie a semi colon and whooose a long list
of
michael
Original comment by mjpta...@gmail.com
on 16 Apr 2010 at 11:10
Michael,
Thanks for noting that - r2134 should have quieted it down a bit by no longer
autocompleting on a range of
symbols. Let us know if you think more need to be added!
Original comment by rowanb@gmail.com
on 19 Apr 2010 at 9:11
Rowan,
testing with r2154
the autocomplete is working much better.
and there seems to be some improvement with deciding when to auto add ' ' and (
) etc
nice work
michael
Original comment by mjpta...@gmail.com
on 23 Apr 2010 at 4:50
I came here to suggest exactly this feature and wasn't surprise by seeing so
many people requesting the same. Actually is very painful in Sequel PRO to
write an SQL command without knowing the field names by heart.
I saw a lot of ways to implement it so please please do it :)
The fields auto-completion add some extra ' which doesn't work for me :( so at
the end I have to remove all those characters to work with my code.
Is there any way to remove the (') from the auto-completion?
Thanks
LP
Original comment by luispedr...@gmail.com
on 21 Jan 2011 at 7:27
Hi,
1) What do mean by "...add some extra ' "? Do you mean ` ? If so, it's MySQL's
default wrap character to identify a given string uniquely as table name and
schema resp.
2) Up to now you can press ⌥⌘3 to come up with a list of field names of the
current selected table; start typing to narrow down that list or press CTRL+ESC
to switch to fuzzy search mode (then you can type "dbdex" to get eg
"ndb_binlog_index - which also works with completion). If you hold down CTRL
while pressing RETURN that list keeps open to be able to insert another field
name.
Please wait for the next release which is coming soon. Here we've implemented a
Navigator which shows all field names plus SQL type etc. including drag&drop,
search functionality. In addition the completion was improved in that respect
and is aware of alias names for table names eg [| = cursor]: "select a.| from
table1 as a" and press ESC to see a list of all fields of table1 etc.
Cheers,
--Hans
Original comment by bibiko@gmail.com
on 21 Jan 2011 at 9:01
Attachments:
The navigator does provide a good solution to the functionality that Mike
Farmer was requesting.
Original comment by mattlangtree
on 14 Jan 2012 at 8:42
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
mike.farmer
on 3 Mar 2009 at 10:03