Lester, Thanks for your advice. I'll take it into account, because also I think that having two tables is a duplication of work ( not only for moving records between them but also for maintaining DDL changes synchronized )
Aldo Caruso El 31/07/13 15:12, Lester Caine escribió: > > Aldo Caruso wrote: > > your approach is correct provided the fact that in your case you > > criteria to define a record as historic is only its timestamp ( be it > > limited to the current day or any other date time criteria ). > > > > Unfortunately that is not my case: records contain real estate data > > and they become historic when properties are sold or the bid is > > withdrawn, a manual criteria which is reflected by a boolean flag in a > > field (or by moving the record into another table) > > The point is still valid. An index which combines your 'state' flag > with a > timestamp provides a filter so you can look for 'all withdrawn bids > between ...' > for example, and the like. I have caller, telephone, emails, > correspondence and > the like for each day which can then be filtered in a similar way. Moving > records between tables is a little pointless if they form a part of a > bigger > 'query' such as 'all activity in March' ? > > -- > Lester Caine - G8HFL > ----------------------------- > Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact > L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk > EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ > Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk > Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]