Database Design: User Profiles like in Meetup.com

Question

In Meetup.com, when you join a meetup group, you are usually required to complete a profile for that particular group. For example, if you join a movie meetup group, you may need to list the genres of movies you enjoy, etc.

I'm building a similar application, wherein users can join various groups and complete different profile details for each group. Assume the 2 possibilities:

1. Users can create their own groups and define what details to ask users that join that group (so, something a bit dynamic -- perhaps suggesting that at least an EAV design is required)
2. The developer decides now which groups to create and specify what details to ask users who join that group (meaning that the profile details will be predefined and "hard coded" into the system)

What's the best way to model such data?

More elaborate example:

The "Movie Goers" group request their members to specify the following:

• Name
• Birthdate (to be used to compute member's age)
• Gender (must select from "male" or "female")
• Favorite Genres (must select 1 or more from a list of specified genres)

The "Extreme Sports" group request their member to specify the following:

• Name
• Description of Activities Enjoyed (narrative form)
• Postal Code

The bottom line is that each group may require different details from members joining their group. Ideally, I would like anyone to create a group (ala MeetUp.com). However, I also need the ability to query for members fairly well (e.g. find all women movie goers between the ages of 25 and 30).

Answer 1

if you're not stuck to mysql, i suggest you to use postgresql which provides build-in array datatypes.

you can define a define an array of varchar field to store group specific fields, in your groups table. to store values you can do the same in the membership table.

comparing to string parsing based xml types, this array approach will be really fast.

if you dont like array approach you can check out xml datatypes and an optional hstore datatype which is a key-value store.

Answer 2

I've had similar issues to this. I'm not sure if this would be the best recommendation for your specific situation but consider this.

1. Provide a means of storing data as XML, or JSON, or some other format that delimits the data, but basically stores it in field that has no specific format.

2. Provide a way to store the definition of that data

3. Provide a lookup/index table for the data.

This is a combination of techniques indicated already.

Essentially, you would create some interface to your clients to create a "form" for what they want saved. This form would indicated what pieces of information they want from the user. It would also indicate what pieces of information you want to search on.

Save this information to the definition table.

The definition table is then used to describe the user interface for entering data.

Once user data is entered, save the data (as xml or whatever) to one table with a unique id. At the same time, another table will be populated as an index with

id where the xml data was saved name of field data is stored in value of field data stored. id of data definition.

now when a search commences, there should be no issue in searching for the information in the index table by name, value and definition id and getting back the id of the xml/json (or whatever) data you stored in the table that the data form was stored.

That data should be transformable once it is retrieved.

I was seriously sketchy on the details here, I hope this is enough of an answer to get you started. If you would like any explanation or additional details, let me know and I'll be happy to help.

Answer 3

Really, this is exactly a problem for which SQL is not a right solution. Forget normalization. This is exactly the job for NoSQL document stores. Every user as a document, having some essential fields like id, name, pwd etc. And every group adds possibility to add some fields. Unique fields can have names group-id-prefixed, shared fields (that grasp some more general concept) can have that field name free.

Except users (and groups) then you will have field descriptions with name, type, possible values, ... which is also very good for a document store.

If you use key-value document store from the beginning, you gain this freeform possibility of structuring your data plus querying them (though not by SQL, but by the means this or that NoSQL database provides).

Answer 4

First i'd like to note that the following structure is just a basis to your DB and you will need to expand/reduce it.

There are the following entities in DB:

• user (just user)
• group (any group)
• template (list of requirement united into template to simplify assignment)
• requirement (single requirement. For example: date of birth, gender, favorite sport)

"Modeling":

**User**
user_id
user_name

**Group**
name
group_id

user_group
user_id (FK)
group_id (FK)

**requirement**:
requirement_id
requirement_name
requirement_type (FK) (means the type: combo, free string, date) - should refers to dictionary)

**template**
template_id
template_name

**template_requirement**
r_id (FK)
t_id (FK)

The next step is to model appropriate schema for storing restrictions, i.e. validating rule for any requirement in any template. We have to separate it because for different groups the same restrictions can be different (for example: "age"). You can use the following table:

**restrictions**
group_id
template_id
requirement_id (should be here as template_id because the same requirement can exists in different templates and any group can consists of many templates)
restriction_type (FK) (points to another dict: value, length, regexp, at_least_one_value_choosed and so on)

So, as i said it is the basis. You can feel free to simplify this schema (wipe out tables, multiple templates for group). Or you can make it more general adding opportunity to create and publish temaplate, requirements and so on.

Hope you find this idea useful

Answer 5

For something like this....you'd want maximum normalization, so you wouldn't have duplicate data anywhere. Because your user-defined tables could possibly contain the same type of record, I think that you might have to go above 3NF for this.

My suggestion would be this - explode your tables so that you have something close to 6NF with EAV, so that each question that users must answer will have its own table. Then, your user-created tables will all reference one of your question tables. This avoids the duplication of data issue. (For instance, you don't want an entry in the "MovieGoers" group with the name "John Brown" and one in the "Extreme Sports" group with the name "Johnny B." for the same user; you also don't want his "what is your favorite color" answer to be "Blue" in one group and "Red" in another. Any data that can span across groups, like common questions, would be normalized in this form.)

The main drawback to this is that you'd end up with a lot of tables, and you'd probably want to create views for your statistical queries. However, in terms of pure data integrity, this would work well.

Note that you could probably get away with only factoring out the common fields, if you really wanted to. Examples of common fields would include Name, Location, Gender, and others; you could also do the same for common questions, like "what is your favorite color" or "do you have pets" or something to that extent. Group-specific questions that don't span across groups could be stored in a separate table for that group, un-exploded. I wouldn't advise this because it wouldn't be as flexible as the pure 6NF option and you run the risk of duplication (how do you predetermine which questions won't be common questions?) but if you really wanted to, you could do this.

There's a good question about 6NF here: Would like to Understand 6NF with an Example

I hope that made some sense and I hope it helps. If you have any questions, leave a comment.

Answer 6

I think this covers most of your constraints:

users
user_id, user_name, password, birth_date, gender

1, Robert Jones, *****, 2011-11-11, M

group
group_id, group_name

1, Movie Goers
2, Extreme Sports

group_membership
user_id, group_id
1, 1
1, 2

group_data
group_data_id, group_id, group_data_name

1, 1, Favorite Genres
2, 2, Favorite Activities

group_data_value
id, group_data_id, group_data_value
1,1,Comedy
2,1,Sci-Fi
3,1,Documentaries
4,2,Extreme Cage Fighting
5,2,Naked Extreme Bike Riding

user_group_data
user_id, group_id, group_data_id, group_data_value_id

1,1,1,1
1,1,1,2
1,2,2,4
1,2,2,5

Answer 7

You could save such data as JSON or XML (Structure, Data)

User Table

• Userid
• Username
• Password
• Groups -> JSON Array of all Groups

GroupStructure Table

• Groupid
• Groupname
• Groupstructure -> JSON Structure (with specified Fields)

GroupData Table

• Userid
• Groupid
• Groupdata -> JSON Data