mattbrailsford
commented
6 years ago Hey Coonmo
That's a really good question.
Generally speaking, content nodes in umbraco or just that, content. With this comes a bunch of "content" based features such as routing, publishing and unpublished, versioning and audit trails to name a few.
Now these might all sound handy, but when dealing with lots of data, these can all add up to cause some big performance issues. There are packages such as UnVersion which can help with limiting the versions history, but if you don't want the other features and their overheads, there isn't really any way to turn them off.
Another issue with using content nodes is that the data will all now be in our internal and external lucene indexes, which at best may require you to write code to exclude it or at worst, if left, could balloon your index sizes and slow your index builds.
Next up is the content dB structure. This is completely outside of your control so becomes considerably harder for you to access the data outside of the cms context. And again, the structure may not be optimal for your needs.
Lastly, if you already have a database table, or other external data store with data in it that you need to manage, then using the content section isnt going to work at all.
Generally speaking then, these are the main reasons why it's considered bad practice to use the content structure for storing "data".
Fluidity then is built to allow you to create/use efficient data stores whilst keeping a level of ui consistency and making it simple to build a custom management interface.
With fluidity, we provide just the ui you need for your data (reusing things like property editors), and leave the rest to you, as who knows your data needs better than you.
Hope this helps explain the differences and when/why you should use each approach.
Matt
On 14 Jan 2018 8:44 pm, "coonmoo" notifications@github.com wrote:
First of all, thank you very much for this package. It works like a charm!
But I'm not sure what kind of advantage does this project offer compared to "normal" Umbraco content nodes where creating the same structures is possible?
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/umco/umbraco-fluidity/issues/15, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAgLyapeoB4A8sLXOGoPxsyq1skXsZ1fks5tKmc_gaJpZM4Rduv6 .
coonmoo
First of all, thank you very much for this package. It works like a charm!
But I'm not sure what kind of advantage does this project offer compared to "normal" Umbraco content nodes where creating the same structures is possible?