AWS Cognito: should you make a custom attribute for a UID? [closed] - amazon-cognito

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 1 year ago.
Improve this question
I want a unique ID for my users in my cognito user pool that can be used in databases. The sub attribute I don't think I want to use because if I ever migrate the data, those will be changed. Is it common practice to generate your own UID for users and set it as a custom attribute to your users when they are created? Is there a better way? Thanks in advance.

The most common practice is using sub as ListUser supports filtering by sub. Best way would be using both username and sub. This way, if you ever decide to migrate your userpool, you easily lookup your database and replace the sub value with new one.

Related

What should I do if I should delete registered user from my db but it has a lot of connections that I don`t want to remove (in my project)? [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed last month.
Improve this question
I try to understand what I should do when the user will ask to delete his account from the app, but it has a lot of info connected to this user and I should leave it. Is it okay if I just make couple of columns null?
One idea is to have a Status column in your user table and you can make the Status Active or Inactive. You can use Inactive to represent a "deleted" user. This way, any data the user created can remain intact, along with all referential integrity relationships.

(Quickbooks Online) Triggering Fields to Autopopulate via the API [closed]

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm creating invoice records via the Quickbooks API, which is working fine. But, certain fields that autopopulate in the UI, are not populating when creating via the API (For instance the Invoice # / DocNumber). Any thoughts on how to force those fields to autopopulate when using the API?
Note: Someone marked this question as unclear. No idea how an exact question can be made any clearer.
Partially figured this one out. The DocNumber needs the AutoDocNumber field set to true. Still a few other fields that are not auto populating, though.
The other fields I just decided to pull from the customer record, since they exist there as well.

SQL - best practices [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I am about to develop a small cms\forum. Multiple customers are going to have there own access where the customers can communicate white them.
What is best practices- to make separate SQL db to each customer's cms data or one big to contain all the customers data?
As I cannot comment, so I can only type here.
It is strange that you would like to have separate database for each customer and it seems impossible to manage multiple db for just one purpose or function. For example, how could you identify which db belong to which customer? Also, do you expect to have many resource to allocate to each customer? a db simply waste if the customer is not active.
So, I suggest you to use one db to manage all the customers data which is normal solution.

What does it mean to make my username unique at database level? [closed]

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
Hey guys. I have a quick question to understand what this means for my project. I am supposed to have my usernames be unique (and enforced at a database level). What does this mean when referring to database level? I am using ASP.net MVC5 with SQL Express as my database.
You are supposed to make certain only unique names are in the database, so you can look at this for more
http://social.msdn.microsoft.com/Forums/sqlserver/en-US/f7ded633-5d66-4cda-a525-96ab97cee868/sqlexpress-create-unique-column
Basically do
Alter table users add constraint uniq_user unique(username)

sql database design - select & check boxes [closed]

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
I am designing a database for a form which contains many select boxes and check boxes lists.
I am unsure whether to populate these lists from a table in the database or from the select html text.
as part of db design best practice which is the preferred method.
If you expect the form elements (checkboxes, lists) are likely to change often, or are conditional (based on configurable permissions/roles), then they should come from a database.
However, if they are mostly static (rarely change, not dependent on configurable permissions), then you should hard-code them. The big benefit of hard-coding them is less traffic on your DB. This will yield the best performance.