-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Suggest you use and SECAS triggered off of the CC or EFT account creation to check for duplicates.
cjhorton sent the following on 2/28/2009 9:31 AM: > Would it be bad form to: > > 1)extend the PaymentMethod entity so that the PK includes the > paymentMethodId and the partyId? > > AND > > 2)not allow duplicate PaymentAccount Number entries(in an entity similar to > the EFT Account)? > > With the OOTB PaymentAccounts, a user/multiple users can have multiple > instances of the same CC or EFT Account Numbers. For my application I am > thinking this might cause some validation issues downline for us. > Basically, I would have only 1 instance of a PaymentAccount number that > belongs to a party(Principal_Investigator). Users can use this account > which is why I would need the additional PK field on the paymentMethod > entity. > > I think I would need to remove the PaymentAccount update/edit feature. > Perhaps my lack of db design experience was just revealed. Can you think of > any problems the above may cause? > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJqXinrP3NbaWWqE4RAvPfAKCsn5+s4Dnp6Y7sz6WYK8K2EVIcYgCfSu9M oTCu1ofUTu7hII9fkWf8pGg= =+QXH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
