SharePoint Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for SharePoint enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

We are designing a system which will have many groups.There may be 100 groups eventually.

We have one main info list that all users with access to one of the groups should have access to.

So far we have avoid having a "all users group".

What we are wondering is should we have a "all users group", or if it is OK with 100 groups having access to a list? Would this cause a performance problem.

share|improve this question
up vote 3 down vote accepted

In my experience 100 groups is not unusually high and well within the boundaries defined by Microsoft.

The boundaries pertinent to the this topic are as follows:

10,000 SharePoint groups per site collection

5,000 Active Directory Principles/Users in a SharePoint group (...depending on how many users you have in your org this is where the "all users" idea can fall apart)

1,000 Security scopes per list

Security principal: size of the Security Scope = 5,000 per Access Control List (ACL)

I would say that as long as you're not breaking inheritance within the list either at a folder or individual item level you shouldn't be concerned that 100 groups are going to cause any performance problems.

Link the 2010 capacity management doc if you want more details:

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.