Better way to handle 'auditing' columns such as created_by, created_dt, last_updated_by, last_updated_dt
Hi guys
In a previous question I made the below comment, which resulted in feedback that there are better ways to handle these values, to include splitting them into a separate table.
Points for advice on a better way to handle this.
Thanks.
Jim
In a previous question I made the below comment, which resulted in feedback that there are better ways to handle these values, to include splitting them into a separate table.
As a general rule any table I design that has data entry, I'll add four 'auditing' columns to it that populate via INSERT and UPDATE triggers:
created_dt - datetime - of the entry
created_by_id - varchar(30) - SUSER_NAME() of the person creating it
last_updated_dt - datetime - of any insert-update
last_updated_by_id - varchar(30) - SUSER_NAME() of the person updating it.
Points for advice on a better way to handle this.
Thanks.
Jim
Do more with
EXPERT OFFICE® is a registered trademark of EXPERTS EXCHANGE®
I have implemented on couple of database servers to catch the data capture, this is inbuilt feature of sql server, which captured the data changes on TL , so it will be faster compared to triggers. In your case I realized that, you need to capture the User who made the changes too, which I am afraid, cant be done thru CDC; every thing related to the changed data can be audited thru CDC.
Change Tracking is more lightweight and can tell you when a change occurred for a given row ... but not what was changed, which CDC can do. CT can't directly tell you "who" either.
Default constraints could provide datetime and SUSER_SNAME() for created.
Default constraints could provide datetime and SUSER_SNAME() for created.
In a separate table you can add more features as for example if the operation was an Insert, Delete or Update, so you can also track deletes.
At the same table you can't track deletes and you don't have an history, only the last change.
Also, you can put the separate table in another file, filegroup or even database. I think it's a more flexible option but it always depends on the goal of the solution that you want.
At the same table you can't track deletes and you don't have an history, only the last change.
Also, you can put the separate table in another file, filegroup or even database. I think it's a more flexible option but it always depends on the goal of the solution that you want.
Premium Content
You need an Expert Office subscription to comment.Start Free Trial