Field X Naming vs Storage

1283 Posts
Bucklash
6 years ago
3
Topic

Hi Folks

FIELD X: Does it matter if the field name and the storage do not match?

Is this good Example:

  1. Field Name: 'field_to_repeat'
  2. Field Type: Text
  3. Storage: Custom | Article | field_x[field]
  4. Field Name: 'field_x_repeats_fields'
  5. Field Type: Field X
  6. Storage: Custom | Article | field_x

Or is this best:

  1. Field Name: 'field_to_repeat'
  2. Field Type: Text
  3. Storage: Custom | Article | field_x_repeats_fields[field_to_repeat]
  4. Field Name: 'field_x_repeats_fields'
  5. Field Type: Field X
  6. Storage: Custom | Article | field_x_repeats_fields

Is there any difference i.e. in searches, or certain things that certain plugins etc might be expecting?

Thanks

Jon

Get a VIP membership
4229 Posts
Kadministrator
6 years ago
2
Level 1

Hi,

I would say try it if there is any difference :) Test it with normal search type and one with search generic field, those are the most problematic things.

1283 Posts
Bucklash
6 years ago
1
Level 2

Hi Klas

Well, I do have field names different to storage and it all seems to be working fine.

Just paranoia takes over sometimes :)

1283 Posts
Bucklash
6 years ago
0
Level 3

Hi again...

... Well, seeing as the data that gets stored is field_name::field_x_name rather than field_storage_name::fieldx_storage_name

so there is absolutely no benefit in having storage different to the name....

Get a Book for SEBLOD