At BlueStar Publications, a table for shipping regions is modified often. They want to examine older configurations in their reports after subsequent updates are recorded. Which design approach supports that need?
Rely on a single definition that reflects ongoing changes
Maintain distinct entries for each configuration change
Separate region definitions into additional dimension tables
Revise existing entries when shipping regions are updated
Having a distinct record for each change allows older states to remain accessible, ensuring historical configurations are not lost. Revising existing entries would remove earlier information, relying on a single definition limits historical analysis, and creating multiple dimension tables quickly becomes unwieldy without preserving each version in a single structure.
Ask Bash
Bash is our AI bot, trained to help you pass your exam. AI Generated Content may display inaccurate information, always double-check anything important.
Why is it important to maintain distinct entries for each configuration change?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What are some possible downsides to revising existing entries instead of creating distinct records?
Open an interactive chat with Bash
What is a dimension table, and why might separating region definitions into additional dimension tables be unwieldy?