jonasmn

Should I store documents in one file/database or in multiple files/databases?

Discussion created by jonasmn on Jan 3, 2018
Latest reply on Jan 8, 2018 by wimdecorte

I have a question wether I should store files in one common file/database or in multiple files/databases depending on the subject of the file. This is what I have:

 

BACKGROUND

File 1

- Clients-db

> ID-Client

- Activity-db

> ID-Activity

+ GUI (layouts etc.)

 

File 2 (external from File 1)

- Documents_general-db

> ID-Documents_general

> IDf-Client

 

File 2 is an external reference to File 1.

 

In File 1 I want to import documents that are related to a specific client. They could be of all kind, photo, protocols, measurments (images, text, pdf, etc). This is done by a relationshop where each document in Documents_general-db point to the ID-Client with IDf-Client. All the documents that are related to a client is then listed in a portal in the layout of File 1. So far so good.

 

QUESTION

Now to my question about how to move on.

 

For each client I also have relationships to Acitivity-db, where activities are listed, such as agendas and protocols from meetings. The relationship is IDf-Client (Acitivity-db) points to ID-Client (the Client-post's ID). No problem here!

 

In each acitivity I would like to have a direct link (button) to the agenda and protocoll related to that activity, so when the user looks through the activities for a certain client, the user should be able to quickly view the agenda and protocol for each meeting/activity.

 

My first thought was to add an extra id-field in Documents_general-db that points to the meeting in question, like IDf-Activity. That would mean that each document in Documents_general-db would have two pointers, one to the Client and one to the Activity, but the pointer to Activity would in some cases be empty, like this:

 

File 2 (external from File 1)

- Documents_general-db

> ID-Documents_general

> IDf-Client (never empty)

> IDf-Acitivity (sometimes empty)

 

In this case ALL documents would be listed in the general listing of documents related to each client, but the documents related to an acitivity would also be accessible from the activity itself.

 

Is this a BAD way of solving my problem, or is a good practice to reduce the number of files in FM?

 

The other option would be to have a file for documents related to activitites also, that would be two extra files, one for agendas and one for protocols.

 

 

Jonas Möller Nielsen

Sweden

Outcomes