Why using username instead of user id?

[Alan DeKok]

Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
> I kinda promised a patch for something like that, didn't I :P ?

  Sure.

> Hopefuly I can start working on it again after 2.2.0 is released. DHCP
> is more "fun" for now :)

  Yup.  I committed the DHCP patches back, that should help.

> My basic idea for the implementation is based on one of my
> implementations, but kinda generalized. Something like:
> - create a module instance that a user can choose, but does not
> replace the existing sql module example (e.g. "mysql5" instance of sql
> module)
> - use stored procedure, since it's the cleanest way to move data
> around from "live" to "historical" (without any need for external
> crontab). Which is also one of the reason for choosing "mysql5"
> instance name, since stored procedure is only supported from mysql5
> onwards.

  Yeah.  My one worry with doing that in FR is it will slow down the
server to do non-"live" accounting things.

> - have a radzap-like function to help user force-move data from live
> to historical (e.g for lost acct-stop case)

  Force stop, have the cleanup function run later.

> - (optional) normalization of username and attribute. This would
> require importing dictionaries to a table.

  I'm ambivalent about that.  It does help in some situations, but it's
an overhead with little gain.

> - if it's tested-enough, then maybe start porting it for other db
> 
> It's still a rough sketch, so if anybody have a better working
> implementation, or a better concept (e.g. something that can work for
> all db with as minimal change to existing configuration as possible),
> or have some spare time to start implementing it, raise your hand  :)

  Not me.  I'm busy.

  Alan DeKok.