nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

cons of having content in same folder.

Mel_Monte

Hi,

Do you know what would be the disadvantages having content in the same folder.
Off course structuring the data this way is bad idea. and we are planning to avoid this.

I need to know whats the hit on the server side? The performance or memory usage.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

nipper

Huh ? Having content in the same folder as what ? Other content ? How much ?

In general it is a bad idea to have folders with many hundred (or more) files. I try to keep the max at 300 or so.

Mel_Monte

Huh ? Having content in the same folder as what ? Other content ? How much ?

In general it is a bad idea to have folders with many hundred (or more) files. I try to keep the max at 300 or so.

hey nipper,

I meant files. Well we want to propose our clients the need to structure their data. but then they would say they'll live with it.
So i need some quantifiable data like performance hit/memory hit so that i can convince them.
I have tried creating such a scenario in our test environment and could see a high memory usage. Do you any other resource that can be hit? The more cons i get the more i can convince them Smiley Very Happy

thanks

vpatel

hey nipper,

I meant files. Well we want to propose our clients the need to structure their data. but then they would say they'll live with it.
So i need some quantifiable data like performance hit/memory hit so that i can convince them.
I have tried creating such a scenario in our test environment and could see a high memory usage. Do you any other resource that can be hit? The more cons i get the more i can convince them

thanks

Usability / user experience could be a BIG con. Maintainability could be another one. There isn't much content management when you do not have any structure to your content, is there?

nipper

You do not say what OS, I am assuming DOS since you mention folders instead of directories.

Sure 3 big reasons. 1, performance - OS's do not like thousands of files in a single directory. 2, CMS usability - users do not like thousands of files in a single directory. 3 SEO (search engine optimization) - google uses the URL (which will likely be dependent on the directory structure) as one of its criteria for ranking. URL is rather important that way so having a descriptive directory structure is an easy way to improve your google standing.

Mel_Monte

yes we have a windows env.
Thanks for the suggesting some cons.

gzevin

You do not say what OS, I am assuming DOS since you mention folders instead of directories.

Sure 3 big reasons. 1, performance - OS's do not like thousands of files in a single directory. 2, CMS usability - users do not like thousands of files in a single directory. 3 SEO (search engine optimization) - google uses the URL (which will likely be dependent on the directory structure) as one of its criteria for ranking. URL is rather important that way so having a descriptive directory structure is an easy way to improve your google standing.

not only that. in order to produce a sinsible site with sensible navigation and other component, one must have a number of folders/directories/dossiers.

Actually, LiveSite does not suggest for multiple directories OOTB

Firenze

Organizing your content is different from organizing your pages.
With LiveSite and SitePublisher the page paradigm is overlapping with the DCT (FormsPublisher) paradigm.
DCRs can still be used in SitePublisher though and this helps promote the reuse of content already addressed with the FormsPublisher paradigm.

Organizing your content in different folders or even branches promotes re-use and also allows for security entitlements to be applied.