Will do. Thanks as usual. On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 11:47 AM, BJ Freeman <[email protected]> wrote:
> -----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----- >
