Before the concept of just preserving the EXACT BUSINESS DOCUMENTS as they were 
created (which are the legal documents of the company's transactions), I had 
seen businesses using a duplicate set of SQL tables to the running system SQL 
tables whereby all the keys were removed so that duplicates could exist and 
then all transactions were processed in the running application tables AND then 
these timestamped transactions were also INSERTED into this second set of 
historical temporal tables to act as a full audit trail.
When you work with the data in these second historical SQL tables it can be a 
little confusing for a while until you get the hang of what it is that you're 
looking at.  You might see nothing in the running tables (because a transaction 
was canceled or deleted) yet you could have a whole series of entries in the 
historical tables related to this transactions history.

The main thing that has to occur to comply with the financial accountability 
laws is that there must be a system that exactly and immutably preserves and 
makes available for search and retrieval, the legal business documents of the 
company's business transactions.  Beyond that, doing a second set of SQL 
historical temporal tables is optional.

Regards,
Gerry




-------------------- m2f --------------------

--
http://www.openobject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=31433#31433

-------------------- m2f --------------------


_______________________________________________
Tinyerp-users mailing list
http://tiny.be/mailman/listinfo/tinyerp-users

Reply via email to