Comment 6 for bug 1777675

Mike Rylander (mrylander) wrote :

Hi Kathy and Jeff,

I would like to second storing the data in a separate table. The functionality could remain the same (even to the point of actively purging previous scan data, perhaps controlled by YAOUS), and copy+scan_time would be a strict subset of a future, full inventory function. It would also reduce churn on the copy table, which is already subject to churn and bloat, and make a possible future implementation simpler -- no need to forcibly copy data to the asset.copy table, or change code and schema during an upgrade.

As an implementation detail, putting the new table in either the action schema, or a new inventory schema, would make sense (but would not be strictly necessary -- we can move a table).

My $0.02...