Not sure what the question is here? Will it work? - Yes. Is it best? - That depends really on how you will use (query) the table in future. Essentially your method makes the original row the CURRENT row, and any previous historic data are kept in newly added rows. The current row's "historic" field presumably stays NULL. Seems fine. Elsewhere I proposed a method for doing this but with historic rows going to a new table. This method of yours achieves the very same, also gaining the advantage of FK relations remaining good while avoiding the disadvantage listed for my method of now having two tables. You do miss out on the size-speed advantage, but from what you've said, that is not a problem at all in your case. So yes, I would say (keeping in mind I'm not intimately familiar with your system architecture or intended history queries) that your method is not only workable, but plausibly the best one for your use case. Does that answer the question?