Custom fields schema

Gervase Markham gerv at
Mon Jan 24 22:53:31 UTC 2005

Christopher Hicks wrote:
> Look at all of the database tweaks in and tell me we're 
> prone to just live with it and not tweak it into shape over time.

But the schema for custom fields is going to be a whole different order 
of complexity. Switching between the two main proposals here isn't a 
case of "drop this column, tweak the type of this table", it's a 
wholesale internal rearrangement.

> The design has been out there for ages and now people are just ripping 
> apart one section - the database design's affect on performance - which 
> was actually done correctly already.  If there's some other "up-front 
> design" that's needed, what is it?

Maybe I haven't been paying attention; I've seen several designs flow 
past, but I didn't realise one of them had been accepted as "the design".


More information about the developers mailing list