I have a servoy solution where all data is entered from a layout which has only globals. When the user hits the “committ” button, that’s when the data gets written from the global layout to the records in the database.
I followed all the steps in the documents to set up audit trail and for the most part, all data seems to be tracked. However, I noticed two serious problems.
There are times when the audit trail doesn’t record the transaction. The user will press “committ” and about 10% of the time, the audit log has NO record of the change whatsoever. BUT..90% of the time, a audit log is created.
There seems to be some serious delay in the writing of the audit log. After a transaction occurs. the audit log won’t show up. I would have to go to the log form, go to layout mode and then back to browse mode and then the records will be there. what gives?
I’m using servoy ver R2 2.2 build 328
SQL server 2000 for my data
BUT my log server is under the log_server repository (should i switch over to SQL server 2000 where the rest of my data is?)
I took this approach for data entry with FileMaker Pro. However with Servoy I created a “Scratch” table for users to enter their raw data. This gives Servoy a much more conventional environment to chew on, and may help with audit trails. (Also keeps the global field count down.)
Once the data is entered in the Scratch table it’s easy to validate whether the user has doubled entered an existing client name and address and perform other similar checks. Then through a relationship with the final resting place table I perform a copy.
Morley:
I took this approach for data entry with FileMaker Pro. However with Servoy I created a “Scratch” table for users to enter their raw data. This gives Servoy a much more conventional environment to chew on, and may help with audit trails. (Also keeps the global field count down.)
Once the data is entered in the Scratch table it’s easy to validate whether the user has doubled entered an existing client name and address and perform other similar checks. Then through a relationship with the final resting place table I perform a copy.
Speed seems fine. Hope this is of help.
Quite a good suggestions? So your “scratch table” . you’re always performing a new record creation whether or not the user commits the transaction?
I hope someone has the answer to my audit trail question still. I’m planning to stick with global method for the first revision of my software.
sammyzheng:
Quite a good suggestions? So your “scratch table” . you’re always performing a new record creation whether or not the user commits the transaction?
Exactly. This table always creates new single-use records and when the new record process is complete the record cannot be revisited again by the user.
I could delete them, but don’t. May turn out to be valuable if the user/server/network screws up. Hasn’t happened yet.