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 withdrawn, a manual criteria which is reflected by a boolean flag in a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 timestamp provides a filter so you can look for 'all withdrawn bids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]