|
|
Posted by Robert Cummings on 07/12/05 21:47
On Mon, 2005-07-11 at 14:29, Chris W. Parker wrote:
> Robert Cummings <mailto:robert@interjinn.com>
> on Friday, July 08, 2005 5:25 PM said:
>
>
> > Thus siteMask should have one of the following values:
> >
> > (1 << 1) == 2 // only site1 can use the product.
> > (1 << 2) == 4 // only site2 can use the product.
> > ((1 << 1) | (1 << 2)) == 6 // both sites can use the product.
>
> Thanks for the example.
>
> But I'm still at a loss as to what strategy I should take regarding
> tables.
>
> Should I create two databases where one database has the product
> information and the other does not? Or should I create one giant
> database with duplicate tables? That is, one database with 'customers'
> and 'customers_two'?
Sorry to respond so late, my free time these days is sporadic :)
My example suggested one database to host all products for both sites.
The bitmask is used as a filter to determine which sites can access the
product information. In this way you keep your products centralized
while providing easy access for either site 1 or site 2 customers.
I also mentioned when I first suggested it, and as another response
mentioned, that you could go with a separate table that provides site to
product relationships and that would be scalable to many more sites. My
suggestion was merely for increased efficiency based on your mention
that you only have two sites in the equation.
Cheers,
Rob.
--
..------------------------------------------------------------.
| InterJinn Application Framework - http://www.interjinn.com |
:------------------------------------------------------------:
| An application and templating framework for PHP. Boasting |
| a powerful, scalable system for accessing system services |
| such as forms, properties, sessions, and caches. InterJinn |
| also provides an extremely flexible architecture for |
| creating re-usable components quickly and easily. |
`------------------------------------------------------------'
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|