Is the unique constraint on the name field mandatory? I am running into situation where different customers have exact same name and the table is refusing to insert record. I don't think the uniqueness should be just on the name, but on name coupled with maybe something like seq no, or another field combined so that you could have same names without collision. Yes I could put "Harry's Barber Shop" and "Harry's Barber Shop 2", but the second Harry might not like this showing on all his invoices. Same for "John Smith" and "John Smith". This would also make it possible in some scenarios to have a sequence of partner records that were marked 'inactive' for the same name. Although I prefer to see any inactive records stored in a corresponding <tablename>_archive table with no keys so that duplicates do not conflict. Then you have a chronological accounting. Anyway, enough rambling about that. How can I best solve this uniqueness problem?
Gerry _______________________________________________ Tinyerp-users mailing list http://tiny.be/mailman/listinfo/tinyerp-users
