Answers.Body: <p>Some of this depends on what the content is for each item. If all these pages are essentially the same sort of thing, but they differ in how you're categorising them - it's just one channel, and you can use Categories to organise them. Given that it seems you could categorise your content either by "production / development" and also by "Entity 1 / 2 / 3 / 4" it sounds like you may be better creating two Category Groups ("Entities" and "Status"), then creating a Category Field for each, which you add to your Entry Type.</p>
  
  <p>There's not really enough to go on in terms of what content you have to advise much more clearly than that though.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-05-18T13:24:06.923Z
Answers.Text: The core content fields are identical.  It sounds like I just need to expand my aperture on how I was planning to use categories, etc.  Thanks.
Answers.UserDisplayName: Hellyar
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-05-18T11:10:35.893Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-05-18T11:10:35.893Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Matt Wilcox
Body: <p>To me, I have a large dataset of 2,000 - 2,400 entries.  It's a static dataset.  I only need to update a few fields annually. </p>
  
  <p>I plan to use <code>channels</code>.   <strong>But, how should I organize the channels?</strong></p>
  
  <p><strong>Option 1</strong>  The entries can easily be divided between <code>development</code> and <code>production</code>.  Each <code>production</code> entry has a corresponding <code>development</code> entry.  This makes it easy to setup related records. This would result in roughly 1,000 to 1,200 entries in each channel.  </p>
  
  <p><strong>Option 2</strong>
  The entries can also easily be divided between 4 entities.  <code>Entity 1</code>, <code>Entity 2</code>, <code>Entity 3</code> and <code>Entity 4</code>.   This would result in 4 channels of roughly 500-600 entries per entity.  So, the <code>development</code> and <code>production</code> relationships would exist within in the same channel.  (I think - assume - this does not present any challenges.)</p>
  
  <p><strong>Which channel structure might be easier to build out and manage?</strong></p>
  
  <p>Thanks    </p>
  
Tags: <sections><channels>
Title: How should I organize/structure my channel sections?
ThreadText: # How should I organize/structure my channel sections?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2018-05-17)
  
  To me, I have a large dataset of 2,000 - 2,400 entries. It's a static dataset. I only need to update a few fields annually.
  
  I plan to use `channels`. **But, how should I organize the channels?**
  
  **Option 1** The entries can easily be divided between `development` and `production`. Each `production` entry has a corresponding `development` entry. This makes it easy to setup related records. This would result in roughly 1,000 to 1,200 entries in each channel.
  
  **Option 2**
  The entries can also easily be divided between 4 entities. `Entity 1`, `Entity 2`, `Entity 3` and `Entity 4`. This would result in 4 channels of roughly 500-600 entries per entity. So, the `development` and `production` relationships would exist within in the same channel. (I think - assume - this does not present any challenges.)
  
  **Which channel structure might be easier to build out and manage?**
  
  Thanks
  
  **Tags:** sections, channels
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2018-05-18. Score: 2
  
  Some of this depends on what the content is for each item. If all these pages are essentially the same sort of thing, but they differ in how you're categorising them - it's just one channel, and you can use Categories to organise them. Given that it seems you could categorise your content either by "production / development" and also by "Entity 1 / 2 / 3 / 4" it sounds like you may be better creating two Category Groups ("Entities" and "Status"), then creating a Category Field for each, which you add to your Entry Type.
  
  There's not really enough to go on in terms of what content you have to advise much more clearly than that though.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_0**: The core content fields are identical.  It sounds like I just need to expand my aperture on how I was planning to use categories, etc.  Thanks.  
  
  ---
  
  