A design question

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • Blueyonder
    #1

    A design question

    This question is not strictly Oracle only but as I'm using Oracle 8i I
    couldn't think of a better place to post it!

    Anyway my problem/qustion is that I have a record that has in access of 200
    fields - all the fields relate entirely to a record. Virtually all fields
    are optional e.g NULL.

    Just wondering is there is a better way to manage them as the users want an
    audit log of changes so before every update the whole record has to written
    to the audit table - this can happen if theres only one change. I know I
    could work out a way to just write changed fields values but time is so
    tight I have to write the entire record for now.

    I could move blocks of fields in to other related tables but there will
    ALWAYS be a one to one relationship so it seems wrong to me anyway to
    separate them.

    Any suggestions/ideas?

    thanks

    harry


    Tags: None
    • Joe Maloney
      #2
      Re: A design question

      "Blueyonder " <a@abc.comwro te in message news:<CaqZb.386 6$xz2.34305279@ news-text.cableinet. net>...
      This question is not strictly Oracle only but as I'm using Oracle 8i I
      couldn't think of a better place to post it!
      >
      Anyway my problem/qustion is that I have a record that has in access of 200
      fields - all the fields relate entirely to a record. Virtually all fields
      are optional e.g NULL.
      >
      Just wondering is there is a better way to manage them as the users want an
      audit log of changes so before every update the whole record has to written
      to the audit table - this can happen if theres only one change. I know I
      could work out a way to just write changed fields values but time is so
      tight I have to write the entire record for now.
      >
      I could move blocks of fields in to other related tables but there will
      ALWAYS be a one to one relationship so it seems wrong to me anyway to
      separate them.
      >
      Any suggestions/ideas?
      Slightly off the wall, but....
      Why not specify RMAN and LOGMINER and keep the archive logs for the
      audit proscribed period? I believe you can reconstruct the
      transactions with LOGMINER and not involve the additional overhead of
      an audit subsystem?
      >
      thanks
      >
      harry

        Comment

        Previous template Next
        Working...