Earnie Boyd wrote:
Quoting Dave Cohen <drupal@dave-cohen.com>:
Personally, I don't see how two DBs improves things. In my experience, nodes are often "configuration" as well as "content". Trying to draw that line somewhere is a mistake, IMHO. You might draw the line where it makes sense for your sites, but not someone elses.
I couldn't agree more. I think of static page content as "configuration" while the dynamic story content as "content". If we take /any/ node as "configuration", we really are in troubles...
Let's think of a classic scenario (before we dive into esoteric ones) where the only changes to the DB, on the production site are: - adding / modifying nodes, comments, files and users - Any watchdog entries, timestamps or counters, as a result of the above While on the dev/staging servers, we change the rest: - views config - CCKs structure - block position / config - probably most of the things under admin/* Menus are a special case, since adding a menu item on production can be considered as adding content, as oppose to changing the menu's block position, or changing fields in views.
As you point out, the list is highly debatable. I think it's undecidable.
I assume the reason it seems undecidable is because each one has his/her own policies and tricks. If we come out with a /fairly good/ solution, one that would fit 80% of all cases, it will help us adapt ourselves to it.