Extending user table to store additional attributes?

[Cary5]

Summary:

I have a client that is pushing to store any additional attributes for a user record that are custom (alternate phone, organization, etc) into a table that extends the user table.

Reasoning:

AFAIK -- Client has multiple instances for different divisions of the company and they might consolidate them in the future. My assumption is they believe by keeping the user table out of box this will make for an easier transfer of data in the future (i'm meeting with the client soon to discuss further).

Question:

I'm not seeing any benefits here nor have I seen any clients do this in the past. Anyone see any reason to go this route or has anyone done this before?

Initial Thoughts:

1. User table isn't extensible OOB (probably for a reason)
2. Users would have their profile data split between 2 records
3. Each user would have 2 records show up in all reference records to the user table (unless filtered out)
4. Could complicate reporting if any of the additional attributes were needed

[Kalaiarasan Pus]

You can try adding fields on the user table if the attributes are fewer in number else instead of extending, create a standalone table and have a reference field on the table to point to corresponding user entry.

[ajbarnes · Accepted solution]

Your initial thoughts seem like you are understanding why this is a terrible idea. Either add the extra fields to the user table directly or in a separate table that is related back to the user record.

[Cary5]

I just wanted to come back and post what I had learned. It turned out the big driver was to relate various types of approvers for a user. The client agreed to the common data attributes remaining on the user record. Thanks for the feedback/replies all.