On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 22:21 +0100, Karoly Negyesi wrote:
I think cck and views are god sends, but I don't think they are ideal for sites that hope to get hit hard and heavy, where more normalized table structures, and less code abstraction can make a big difference.
Time to market, cost of development, cost of maintenance (custom module vs. community maintained views/cck) are also factors besides sheer performance.
I just want to have my cake and ice cream... I'd like to take advantage of all the RAD stuff provided by CCK & Views, set up my site and content types, and views.... Down the road we start getting bigger... We start getting 200-300K hits an hour... I hit the convert to module button, and have a module that provides the behavior of my defined views and content types, with less abstraction, hopefull less time in code as a result... Down the road we want to add a new attribute to content type z, so we revert the site to a CCK/Views site... (definitions should still be stored, just need to back port all my data.) I update my content definitions and views, recompile my module and voila.. Its a strange fantasy I know... .darrel.