> I am confused. So, there should be no hard-coding. Right? Either ID or > name will be a variable or defined in a configuration table or file.
I think Ryan is wondering about hard-coding the FREQUENCY_PAYMENT_ID of 2. This is generally a bad idea for reasons I probably won't get right, but I think it has something to do with the need to sometimes change primary keys. I'd say it is better to hard-code the LOOKUP_NAME, since that symbolic name for the FREQUENCY_PAYMENT_ID is less likely to change. > Performance wise, you would want to go the ID which should be unique > and indexed. I agree. But I think the difference is going to be negligible in this case. I'm pretty rusty on SQL performance tuning, but using MySQL's EXPLAIN to profile the queries shows that all lookups are index-based in both cases. I believe that means that they will scale similarly to large tables.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H
_______________________________________________ Mifos-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mifos-users
