I am trying to figure out the purpose of the spawn_location_name table and why it was separated? Can we not just merge it with the spawn_location_entry table? If we do not want to return the name for speed purposes, we can just remove 'name' from the query.

i agree,
IMO , if a sub table has only one useable column, and has an entry for 80-90 percent of the parent tables entries such as this one
then the tables should be combined

spawn_location_entry has 178315 rows
spawn_location_name has 175899 rows

Looking at it again, I think in a way this is a many to one relationship. I do not see that used often if ever though. Look at both tables closely and you will see how you can use it that way.

off topic

so i have seen you lurking about latley and NB online are you back to working on it? or something new?

I am going to be working on it. Currently I am writing a web editor for public use and my use. I should had done that to begin with, that in itself slowed me down greatly last time. My time is way more limited this time, 2-3 hours a day. That is good though, that will prevent any type of burnout.

I may be wrong on this but I believe this table is just for content devs/web editor to give a name to locations to make it easier to identify what should be in the location. I do not think the server uses it for anything, not even sure the server loads this table.

I definitely think they should be named.

I do want to verify this though. So from this screenshot, you will see I have multiple spawn_location_id with the same ID, different percentages. But if I gather right, that would still have one spawn_location_name, something like zone_location_458353 or something like that. What I am getting at, is you would have a many-to-one with the spawn_location_name table.

Correct

I remember reading that it was for devs to identify easier. Maybe the wiki? I'll see if I can get find it again and then link to it.

I am just wondering about some of the tables and uniqueness. It just seems like there can be multiples with no restrictions. I think we need unique keys on some of these.

So final word, the spawn_location_name should be a one-to-one for the spawn_location_entry table?