Timeline for Cascading "Deleted" records that aren't really deleted
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 10, 2014 at 14:25 | comment | added | Michael | It was a while ago so I'm not 100% sure but I think 4 developers, 3 testers and 1 analyst. | |
| Jan 10, 2014 at 14:21 | comment | added | JonH | Michael if you don't mind me asking how big was your team of developers for such a project like this? | |
| Jan 10, 2014 at 14:19 | comment | added | Michael | Duplicating the tables isn't a problem if the audit tables are automatically deployed and kept in sync - same with code, all we had to do was provide an injector at the data layer to switch between the audit tables and the live tables - all queries stayed the same. | |
| Jan 10, 2014 at 14:14 | comment | added | JonH | I can see this as one way and we thought of it but I believe it fits for financial type systems. We would have to duplicate so many more tables and relationships and the code base would grow significantly. However, I can see the need in your case. | |
| Jan 9, 2014 at 17:17 | history | answered | Michael | CC BY-SA 3.0 |