I always had one concern with the existing database layout (beside the fact that all content of all types are stored in one table) and this is the text format which is used for all sort of data (numeric, date, decimal etc).
Maybe in a future version, as a first step, some additional "field_value" columns can be introduced. Like field_value_integer, field_value_datetime ...
In an existing setup with a parent/child combination, i made some tests.
Using around 40K records with a 1:1 relation, it takes more than 100x more time to get the result from the indexed text (longtext) field against the indexed int(11) field ....
Just an observation and another area where performance improvements can be introduced.
I always had one concern with the existing database layout (beside the fact that all content of all types are stored in one table) and this is the text format which is used for all sort of data (numeric, date, decimal etc).
Maybe in a future version, as a first step, some additional "field_value" columns can be introduced. Like field_value_integer, field_value_datetime ...
In an existing setup with a parent/child combination, i made some tests.
Using around 40K records with a 1:1 relation, it takes more than 100x more time to get the result from the indexed text (longtext) field against the indexed int(11) field ....
Just an observation and another area where performance improvements can be introduced.