... and (3) the values are not updated on manual actions without
triggers - which might or might not be desirable depending on the intention.
Best,
Johannes
On 9/4/2024 16:36, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> On 9/4/24 06:17, Khan Muhammad Usman wrote:
>> Yes this would be the better approach.
>
> 1) Except the overhead is now shifted to the application, which may or
> not be better. You are also moving the audit responsibility to the
> application and the application maintainers and making it application
> specific. If a new application/client starts hitting the database and
> it did not get the memo about the audit fields they won't be filled in.
>
> 2) I would recommend setting up a some realistic tests and see if the
> overhead of the update triggers would be a concern.
>
>
>
