|
|
Posted by Sanders Kaufman on 09/29/07 18:26
"Bruno Barros" <ragearc@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1191074247.467211.245600@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> I, for my framework, put:
>
> ID
> USERNAME
> PASSWORD
> EMAIL
>
> That is for the simple login / logout / register data.
> Then, according to the application, there is another user table, which
> holds all the user's information. It is always made from scratch as I
> never know which fields my customer requires or my code needs ;). For
> example, for a social networking site you need about me, musical
> interests, ..., but for a customer account on a shop, you needn't such
> things. The main users table only stores what is essential in ALL
> users. Then I make a relation between them, connecting users by ID.
> The record with ID X on main table belongs to ID X on the other table.
>
> By the way, PHPBB3, MediaWiki and such are not frameworks, they are
> not made to be as broad as possible. They are ONLY made for themselves
> and their specific needs, while a framework needs us to remember that
> it has to work with all websites from top to bottom.
I'm woring on a similar situation.
I've got a userid, username, emailaddress and password.
But I also want fields for login_cookie, last_login, and parent_user.
I don't really WANT to create whole nother table to track that stuff, but
good design dictates that I should.
The question becomes - if I break atomicity for expedience's sake, what will
be the consequences?
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|