<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Building Accounting Software Tips</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.accountingsoftwaredevelopment.com/building-accounting-software-tips/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.accountingsoftwaredevelopment.com/building-accounting-software-tips/</link>
	<description>Programming Accounting Systems</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 16 Mar 2010 14:49:26 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Pavel Ahanouski</title>
		<link>http://www.accountingsoftwaredevelopment.com/building-accounting-software-tips/comment-page-1/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>Pavel Ahanouski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Jun 2009 16:52:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.accountingsoftwaredevelopment.com/?p=15#comment-5</guid>
		<description>What is a better database structure for Accounting applications -- based on one or two journal entry tables?

I have seen both designs, having two tables seems to be more resource intense, but easier to understand (more logical)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is a better database structure for Accounting applications &#8212; based on one or two journal entry tables?</p>
<p>I have seen both designs, having two tables seems to be more resource intense, but easier to understand (more logical)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
