Granted, I've not yet dived into the D7 specifics of creating custom content types, but I'd like to address a point Nancy makes here:
Lastly, why? I would think that the overhead of managing multiple tables would outweigh any potential gains. I can't even begin to think what you would have to do to Views to make it work in your scenario. I consider it an issue of quality documentation. When I was first learning module development, CCK was nice, but I could not figure out how to programmatically create or manage CCK fields. Being unable to programmatically create content types with CCK meant that my modules either could not implement content types, or I'd have to make them without CCK. There was no quality documentation explaining CCK at the time, so via books like "Front End Drupal" and "Pro Drupal Module Development" I learned how to create my own tables and manage them myself, including the not-difficult-because-it's-documented integration of custom fields with Views. (see: http://views-help.doc.logrus.com/help/views/api-tables). I absolutely do not mean to pick on Nancy. I love Drupal. I'm betting my company on the Drupal technology stack. But developers have got to realize that unless what they offer is documented, in a manner that others can recreate and expand on your module's facilities, it may as well not exist. Poor or missing documentation leads to poor, incorrect, or missing integration with other modules. (Sorry if this sounds like a rant. Trying to figure out things in Drupal is a sore spot for me.) Sincerely, -Blake [email protected] www.BlakeSenftner.com On Feb 11, 2011, at 7:16 AM, nan wich wrote: > There are several extra questions to be asked here: > Define "separate." If one creates a node module that creates content types, > then one must manage the extra fields - generally in new (i.e. separated from > node & node_revisions) tables created by the module. > If one is talking about content created by other (e.g. core) modules, then > the answer is maybe. Take a look at the sql rewriting hooks or whatever D7 > has done to them. > Lastly, why? I would think that the overhead of managing multiple tables > would outweigh any potential gains. I can't even begin to think what you > would have to do to Views to make it work in your scenario. > > Nancy > > > Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. -- Dr. Martin L. King, > Jr. > > > > From: Deva <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Fri, February 11, 2011 7:59:26 AM > Subject: [development] Is it possible to have separate table for different > content types in D7 > > Hi All, > > Is possible to have separate table for each content type? > > Thanks in advance > > -- > :DJ > >
