Jim, My general principle fails eventually, because you can never design a perfect database that anticipates everything that is going to change in the business. Whenever the company wants a new piece of information that has never been collected or entered before, you will have to change the schema, and make those choices about adding a new linked table or adding new columns to existing tables.
Either way, forms and reports etc have to be redone or created. But that's also the time to make choices based on your own productivity and the time it will take to implement, and then imagine new future changes that this change might be able to predict. Bill On Wed, Feb 22, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Jim Belisle <[email protected]> wrote: > When it comes to history, are you saying it is better to have multiple > tables with just that one common field therefore eliminating the need > for schema changes? > > So as the company asks for new fields, I just create a new in most cases > small table (as far as number of columns are concerned) and the new data > is entered there. >
