Database Design problem

My Account database got around 50tables , For each Table, I need to make a
history table with same structures.
Now, I can use triggle to do it very well.
My question it. Should I create another database named "ACCOUNT_HISTORY" ,
and create same table ?
or Should I create the table with prefix "HISTORY_" and place under the same
database '
Please give me some advice. Thanks in advance.Agnes
I think we've already answered your question yesterday, haven't we?
"Agnes" <agnes@.dynamictech.com.hk> wrote in message
news:uKWdEDt2FHA.3136@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
> My Account database got around 50tables , For each Table, I need to make a
> history table with same structures.
> Now, I can use triggle to do it very well.
> My question it. Should I create another database named "ACCOUNT_HISTORY" ,
> and create same table ?
> or Should I create the table with prefix "HISTORY_" and place under the
> same database '
> Please give me some advice. Thanks in advance.
>
>|||Yes. Uri, Yesterday, I ask about the "How to write triggle rule" and I solve
it now,
from the article you give me , it said " you can keep your databases smaller
and more manageable. "
which means. I should create another database which store historical record
, right '
"Uri Dimant" <urid@.iscar.co.il> glsD:uzAuzPt2FHA.2796@.tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...[col
or=darkred]
> Agnes
> I think we've already answered your question yesterday, haven't we?
> "Agnes" <agnes@.dynamictech.com.hk> wrote in message
> news:uKWdEDt2FHA.3136@.TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...
>[/color]|||Maintaining referential accross databases is rather difficult. To maintain i
t
"naturally" (through the use of foreign key constraints) consider storing
historical data in the same database, yet on a separate file group (perhaps
even on a separate physical disk).
Other than that, IMHO all options are up to you.
ML