I would like to see the ability to render Relevant Content items with a node, in a similar manner to taxonomy tags, for those of us who prefer not to use CCK.

I have hacked this functionality together myself by injecting calls to relevant_content_term_cache() & relevant_content_block() into the hook_view() of my own content type and it works well (it's just injecting an "invisible" block after all!).

I would be really nice to be able to, for any given content-type, specify the criteria for displaying related links on the content-type's admin page along with all the other settings such as comment type, attachments, etc.

I would be willing to create & submit patches for both 5.x and 6.x versions if this is considered desirable :).

Comments

nicholasthompson’s picture

nicholasthompson
Primary language English
commented
Status: Active » Closed (won't fix)

Sorry, but this is just duplicating code which is covered by CCK.

I know you said you dont want a CCK field and, if that's the case, you've done the right thing by implementing your own module (I hope!) with hook_nodeapi (or hook_view if its your own module's nodetype) and calling the appropriate functions.

For the rest of us who consider CCK something thats installed by default on 90% of drupal sites, we have the CCK field which allows weighting/positioning of the field within the content too and well as as configuration options for that field.

If you wish to attach patches to this so google can pick them up then please do and I do appreciate the feature request, but I think it would just add a feature to the module which - if needed - would generally be needed by those who already have CCK (as they probably would have wanted to add other content to node types too).

Cheers

FrankieBegbie’s picture

FrankieBegbie commented

Hello,

Yes, I understand about the code duplication. I will submit a patch as you suggest, for others to pick up. I'd intended to refactor the existing CCK code to a set of functions which could then be called from hook_view / CCK as required.

(My reason for not using CCK is the size of our node/comments tables, which makes CCK impractical).

I'll get something done in the following week!

nicholasthompson’s picture

nicholasthompson
Primary language English
commented

Excellent, thanks Frankie.

Just out of interest - how many nodes do you have? I don't think CCK is *that* much of a hit, is it?

FrankieBegbie’s picture

FrankieBegbie commented

We have 250,000+ nodes currently and will probably double that in the next 6 months - it's a very active social-networking/news site with discussions, job adverts, classifieds, business directories, etc.

CCK impacts significantly due to the way it stores it's content - makes it awkward to do JOINs especially when doing tasks such as linking user groups to news sections, topics to internal classified ads - you get the picture!

We ended up writing out own content-type modules and the performance is one, sometimes two, orders of magnitude above CCK :O.