Oh I completely agree that the idea is ridiculous. The story behind this is that the company doing our SOX audit has developed an attitude about direct access to SQL and indirect access to SQL (via X++, for example).
Their recommendation was to implement database logging on a whole list of tables, many of which we already log such as Customers, Vendors, Released products and supporting tables, etc. In that list was the general journal tables (GENERALJOURNALACCOUNTENTRY, GENERALJOURNALENTRY, LEDGERJOURNALTABLE, LEDGERJOURNALTRANS, etc.) and inventory (INVENTTRANS, etc.). These tables combined comprise probably three quarters of our total data, to the tune of 20 million records in each table to date.
Microsoft's recommendations about NOT database logging these tables is pretty clear. My instincts tells me it is a terrible idea even without trying it, but I thought I would at least ask if anyone had tried it.
For a long while their attitude was that it should NEVER be necessary to directly touch the database with SQL at all, which of course is nonsense also. Even the occasional update is perfectly safe and a huge time saver, and the periodic data surgery to fix a bug that otherwise doesn't have a straightforward solution within the product is unavoidable, despite best practices.