I just noticed that the Schema Browser (Indexes tab) changed in 12.5. In 12.5, the “Position” column was dropped, and all the indexed columns are just lumped together, which in my opinion is just horrible. I’ve searched for a way to add the “Position” column back, but I haven’t had any luck, is there a way to put this back to the way it was in 12.1? I’m sure there are some folks that like this new view, but I much prefer it the way it was.
Thanks in advance
Note that the column “Column Name” chnaged to “Columns” plural - so they are all listed in order in the one field - which is easier to read. Not defending the chnage - just explaining it.
Hi Bert, I saw that, and don’t like it. I’m looking for a way to switch back to the old view.
Sorry, there’s no way to switch back. I hope you’ll adjust and come to like this way better. I think it’s so much easier to get a feel for the indexes at a glance this way, in terms of how many there are, and how many columns each one of them has. Until today, folks have seemed to like this change, but if it turns out to be an unpopular change, we could go back. One thing you might could do in the meantime to get the old display is add a custom query (select table, rt-click, last one in the list) . If you’ve never used custom queries before, it’s just an easy way to plug your own query against the data dictionary into Toad, and then right-click on the objects of interest to apply it to.
If you want help getting that done, let me know.
John, I have to say this is a very disappointing response, it really makes me rethink my companies investment in Toad. Did someone request this change, or did you guy’s just decide to make it without soliciting community feedback. Custom queries are not the answer, and they’re not even something I want to consider, I want the original functionality back. Seriously, how hard would it be to add an option to allow us to switch between views.
I’ve created a toad idea pond for people to vote on this issue:
www.toadworld.com/…/schema_browser_-tables-_indexes_tab_revert_to_old_style.aspx
Thanks, how many votes is it gonna take to revert it back?
It wasn’t just a willy-nilly change. I’ll admit it was my idea but I did go around asking several people what they thought and everyone seemed to like it.
You’ve been on this forum long enough to know how committed we are to you guys. I’m didn’t mean to say “Too bad, get used to it” or anything like that. I just meant to say “Give it a try, I hope it will grow on you”, and I did say “…we could go back”, and there was certainly an unsaid “we could have it as an option”.
Hopefully that “rethink my companies investment in Toad” comment was just venting of some frustration.
Hi John,
Please accept my apology for my harsh comments. It’s 10 AM and already been a frustrating day, and I vented here when I shouldn’t have. I really love Toad for Oracle, and you guy’s do a great job of supporting us. I do understand how the new view might be considered usefull, but I really did prefer it the way it was. My hope is you can find a way to provide an option for users to choose between the original and new view.
We’ve all had days like that. Don’t worry about it. II’ll take a look at making an option between old and new.
I’ll take partial credit/blame on the idea, although my initial whining about it probably predates the Idea Pond. I always preferred the way the Quest/Dell SQL Optimizer displayed indexes over Toad. To me, a DBA-type, it’s tons quicker to view the index columns at-a-glance, since our ERP system thinks that 10 columns are truly needed in an index (and that index is never used – go figure).
Then again, I like real tabs in my code. So, I’ve got that going for me, which is nice…
Options are a Great Thing™!
My $.02,
Rich
What took you so long 
Must be because it’s a Friday
THANKS John.
That’s perfect!!! You guy’s really are awesome!
Hi John, I just downloaded the 12.5.1 update but this wasn’t included, any idea what future release might have this? Is it in the current beta?
Thanks in advance!
Yes, it is in the current beta.
Thanks John.
