I am tracking changes made to a certain table (with over 50 fields) by writing the full record before and after an update has been done to a second table. My audit table also has 50 fields plus 3 more for type, user and date.
This method sometimes does not allow the user to quickly see the difference between the before and after states of a record. The user would prefer if only the changed fields get written to the record.
Questions:
1. do I rewrite how the changes are tracked to suit the user? P.S. time is against this alternative
2. even if I do rewrite how changes are tracked, how I design my report given that the user may change 1st and 50th field for a particular record.
designing a report that requires a legal-sized paper per change record seems a waste since a user can generate many change records in a single session.
Regards,
NattyP
This method sometimes does not allow the user to quickly see the difference between the before and after states of a record. The user would prefer if only the changed fields get written to the record.
Questions:
1. do I rewrite how the changes are tracked to suit the user? P.S. time is against this alternative
2. even if I do rewrite how changes are tracked, how I design my report given that the user may change 1st and 50th field for a particular record.
designing a report that requires a legal-sized paper per change record seems a waste since a user can generate many change records in a single session.
Regards,
NattyP
