| Time |
Nick |
Message |
| 04:23 |
|
sbrylander joined #evergreen |
| 06:31 |
|
Griff`Ron|2 joined #evergreen |
| 06:32 |
|
BigRig joined #evergreen |
| 07:19 |
|
collum joined #evergreen |
| 07:32 |
|
mrpeters joined #evergreen |
| 07:34 |
|
rjackson-isl joined #evergreen |
| 08:30 |
|
jboyer-isl joined #evergreen |
| 08:32 |
|
ericar joined #evergreen |
| 08:33 |
|
ericar left #evergreen |
| 08:41 |
|
Shae joined #evergreen |
| 08:42 |
|
mmorgan joined #evergreen |
| 08:50 |
|
krvmga joined #evergreen |
| 08:52 |
krvmga |
i have an opac search issue that is odd to me. |
| 08:54 |
mmorgan |
krvmga: What are you seeing? |
| 08:54 |
krvmga |
in our catalog at http://bark.cwmars.org , if i do a search for "world war ii" with a format limiter of Book(all), i get fewer results than if i do the same search using a more restrictive limiter of Book(regular print). |
| 08:54 |
krvmga |
the reverse should be true. |
| 08:55 |
krvmga |
if i do the search without the quotation marks, the numbers turn out the way i'd expect. |
| 08:55 |
krvmga |
with the quotation marks, no |
| 08:55 |
|
Dyrcona joined #evergreen |
| 08:55 |
krvmga |
is there a quotation mark problem? |
| 08:55 |
krvmga |
i don't know what's causing this. |
| 08:56 |
krvmga |
the format limiter Book(all) is item_type(a,t) |
| 08:57 |
krvmga |
the format limiter Book(regular print) is item_type(a,t) -item_form(a,b,c,d,f,g,h,i,o,q,r,s,z) |
| 09:07 |
Dyrcona |
The quotes very likely change the search. |
| 09:08 |
Dyrcona |
One would assume it turns it into a phrase. |
| 09:08 |
Dyrcona |
berick: It turns out that I have not been running the fine generator on my new dev VM for the past ten days. |
| 09:08 |
Dyrcona |
berick: Anything in particular I should watch for while testing your branch? |
| 09:09 |
krvmga |
Dyrcona: i'm guessing that is so. what i can't account for is why there are more results with a more restrictive format filter. |
| 09:10 |
mmorgan |
krvmga: I get more results in our catalog with book(all) - 6304 vs book(regular print) - 4192, so am not seeing the same thing |
| 09:10 |
dbs |
krvmga: do you page through all of the results to find out how many there actually are? |
| 09:11 |
dbs |
the "about" in "x of about y results" is truth, it's an estimate based on the sampling of the first set of matches it finds |
| 09:11 |
dbs |
just like google estimates how many search results you'll get on the first page of results |
| 09:12 |
Dyrcona |
Yeah, this is another place where Evergreen estimates. |
| 09:12 |
Dyrcona |
Kind of like how the "hold queue position" is a lie. |
| 09:12 |
krvmga |
mmorgan: is that with or without quotation marks? |
| 09:13 |
mmorgan |
krvmga: With quotes |
| 09:13 |
krvmga |
dbs: i haven't done that yet. i will do it now. |
| 09:13 |
krvmga |
mmorgan: thanks |
| 09:14 |
Dyrcona |
Also, you didn't mention if your search is subject, title, key word or what. |
| 09:18 |
Dyrcona |
I take back what I said about the hold queue position. In that case it is the opposite. |
| 09:18 |
Dyrcona |
It is too literal to be taken seriously. Holds don't necessarily fill in that order. |
| 09:20 |
krvmga |
dbs: it looks like it's the estimate. as i page through, the "about" number adjusts upwards roughly every 1000 returns i go through. |
| 09:24 |
|
rjackson-isl joined #evergreen |
| 09:31 |
|
dbwells joined #evergreen |
| 09:32 |
dbs |
Yeah, the estimate improves as you page through the search results. Just like Google. |
| 09:32 |
dbs |
The bigger the sample size, the better the estimate. |
| 09:41 |
|
RoganH joined #evergreen |
| 09:54 |
krvmga |
dbs: i paged through both searches and got 5524 for Book(all) and 5217 for Book(regular print). this result conforms to expectations for the format limiters. |
| 09:55 |
berick |
Dyrcona: if running with parallel=1 (from opensrf.xml), then the main thing to look for is reduced memory consumption. beyond that, regardless of the parallel setting, it should be slightly faster ovarall since it skips no-fines transactions up front. |
| 09:55 |
krvmga |
LPT - for quick paging through the results, just add the string ;page=<the page number you want> after the locg string in the URL. |
| 09:56 |
krvmga |
LPT - don't use the last estimated page number because that will likely change. use a somewhat earlier number. |
| 09:58 |
krvmga |
;page=<your number> should be the last bit of the URL string |
| 09:59 |
krvmga |
i'm curious, though, how the software actually makes the estimates. |
| 10:01 |
Dyrcona |
berick: OK. I don't have a baseline for comparison at this point but I know it used to take hours. We'll see what happens. |
| 10:01 |
* berick |
nods |
| 10:07 |
Dyrcona |
berick: Looks like I've parallel=6 for fines and holds. Probably just copied the config from production. |
| 10:09 |
berick |
Dyrcona: in that case, make sure you you have my latest patch (commented in LP yesterday) |
| 10:09 |
berick |
otherwise, there will be no difference |
| 10:10 |
Dyrcona |
Yep. cherry-picked it this morning. |
| 10:10 |
berick |
k |
| 10:10 |
berick |
to be clear, the code has minimal effect on parallel > 1 instances |
| 10:11 |
berick |
well, depending on the # of no-fines circs, it may be more than minimal |
| 10:12 |
Dyrcona |
I should count how many no fine circs we have vs. total circs. |
| 10:12 |
Dyrcona |
Of course, my dev. database is 10 days out of date, so I'll have more overdue things than normal. |
| 10:36 |
|
Griff`Ron joined #evergreen |
| 11:03 |
|
abowling joined #evergreen |
| 11:03 |
|
abowling left #evergreen |
| 11:08 |
Dyrcona |
Well, that's good. It finished in about 1 hour, little under. |
| 11:09 |
Dyrcona |
That's on 10 days of catching up, too. |
| 11:35 |
|
akilsdonk joined #evergreen |
| 12:03 |
|
jihpringle joined #evergreen |
| 12:23 |
|
bmills joined #evergreen |
| 12:28 |
|
kitteh_ joined #evergreen |
| 13:00 |
|
nhilton joined #evergreen |
| 13:00 |
|
nhilton_ joined #evergreen |
| 13:24 |
cfarley |
Late yesterday I mentioned problems I was having with placing holds though OPAC. I reviewed all my apache logs and opensrf and can't find any errors. |
| 13:24 |
cfarley |
One thing I noticed is that if I click advanced options under the Place Hold Screen I get the following message "This item does not have any formats available for holds placement" |
| 13:25 |
cfarley |
Does that give anyone ideas of where I can look to resolve my issues. |
| 13:27 |
RoganH |
Is this a new system? |
| 13:27 |
RoganH |
Have you gone through the checking holds policies, checking that items are holdable / not reference etc...? |
| 13:29 |
RoganH |
The majority of the time people report holds issues to me the issues isn't technical but either cataloging or policy based. |
| 13:31 |
cfarley |
What is the most nonrestrictive way to have hold policy set, without any policy at all? |
| 13:34 |
RoganH |
We're a consortium so I've never made that kind of policy in practice but you could make a very simple policy that said don't use strict ou match, set the owning library as the top level and for all users and all item types. |
| 13:35 |
RoganH |
But to answer the literal question there isn't a way to have a hold policy without a policy but you can have a very simple very broad policy. |
| 13:37 |
Dyrcona |
It's actually a good idea to start with such a rule, and then add limits from there. |
| 13:39 |
cfarley |
If a rule isn't allowing me to place a hold, should I get a message at all? |
| 13:39 |
RoganH |
Evergreen tries to give you feedback so you'll get messages for many things. |
| 13:40 |
cfarley |
currently when I click the Submit button on the place hold form, it reloads the page, no error of any kind. |
| 13:40 |
Dyrcona |
cfarley: Yes, you'd get a message on screen that the hold is not allowed according to the rules or something like that. Not that there are no holdable formats. |
| 13:40 |
Dyrcona |
Look closely. It will look just like the place hold screen but should have some text in red. |
| 13:41 |
RoganH |
The holdable formats message sounds a bit like the message you'd get when there aren't any items eligible to fill the hold but I don't recall exact wording. |
| 13:43 |
cfarley |
Hmm, ok, figuring out some things here. |
| 13:43 |
Dyrcona |
Yeah, I'm not sure where that would come from either without digging into the code. |
| 13:43 |
cfarley |
It seems to be releated to pickup location |
| 13:55 |
cfarley |
So the Pickup location is only showing our Catelog, one time it loaded our system and branches, when I selected the correct branch it placed the hold correctly. |
| 13:57 |
bshum |
Hmm, maybe an autogen & apache restart required |
| 13:59 |
bshum |
I've seen that before though. Where not selecting a proper pickup lib causes hold placement to fail out. |
| 14:00 |
* bshum |
thinks there's a bug ticket for that |
| 14:03 |
Dyrcona |
Probably just autogen.sh, though an apache restart or reload won't hurt. |
| 14:03 |
cfarley |
bshum: Thank you, all locations are showing correctly after autogen and apache restart |
| 14:05 |
|
nhilton_ joined #evergreen |
| 14:06 |
bshum |
cfarley: Oh good, glad that worked. |
| 14:09 |
cfarley |
So an recap for other who might make the same mistake. We are a small "library" with a single physical location. Setting up evergreen we created a catelog and that was mostly a placeholder and then two system, one for our active library and one for our archive. We then made branches for different physical locations inside our library. This worked fine except that on OPAC we didn't want... |
| 14:09 |
cfarley |
...our users to see the systems or branches, so those were made invisible on opac. This is what broke the hold function. |
| 14:11 |
RoganH |
Always take advice with a grain of salt (or from me with a whole salt lick) but I think long term using branches for locations inside your library is going to cause your more trouble than you want. |
| 14:11 |
RoganH |
The only times I do that is when they have really distinct rules from the rest of the building like a special archive area. |
| 14:12 |
RoganH |
I'm sure you can get it to work but down the road you may regret it. |
| 14:12 |
bshum |
It's not unheard of though. |
| 14:13 |
RoganH |
bshum: to play anti-devil's advocate, just because you've heard of it doesn't mean you'd want to do it :) |
| 14:14 |
RoganH |
It's a slick setup if you're willing to say that long term you'll live with any issues that arise. |
| 14:14 |
cfarley |
We just stumbled into it, not really knowing the best way to set things up for a small organization such as us. |
| 14:14 |
bshum |
RoganH: Might also depend on what legacy system they're emulating. |
| 14:15 |
RoganH |
bshum: bah. |
| 14:15 |
bshum |
Or at least, that was the case for two systems that I know of who use org units as locations, not just physical distinct entities. |
| 14:15 |
bshum |
But yeah, I getcha ;) |
| 14:15 |
RoganH |
bshum: personally, I think emulating an old system is a dangerous trap |
| 14:16 |
RoganH |
bshum: it's like taking a short cut across quicksand "this really wasn't the faster way to get there" |
| 14:16 |
cfarley |
I think I was going to try to operate without branches, but it wouldn't let me delete the ou |
| 14:17 |
collum |
A dangerous trap, but a smidgen of librarians don't like change. |
| 14:17 |
bshum |
collum: Understatement of the year? |
| 14:17 |
bshum |
What little is left of 2014 anyways |
| 14:17 |
RoganH |
collum: bah |
| 14:17 |
RoganH |
It's not librarians, humans as a whole don't like change. |
| 14:18 |
Dyrcona |
cfarley: Evergreen pretty much assumes you have Consortium -> Systems -> Branches. You can change that, but things might crumble at the edges. |
| 14:18 |
RoganH |
But sometimes short term change is less painful than the illusion of stability that falls out from under you. It's actually management's job not IT's to tell the front line that. |
| 14:18 |
jcamins |
RoganH: true, but only librarians are going around configuring ILSes, as a rule. |
| 14:19 |
cfarley |
Dyrcona: is there a suggest way to set things up if you don't have those levels? |
| 14:19 |
RoganH |
jcamins: I'm just saying you see change adverse attitudes everywhere, not just libraries. Change over any big central system in any organization and you'll see it. |
| 14:19 |
Dyrcona |
cfarley: Yes, pretend that you do. :) |
| 14:20 |
Dyrcona |
cfarley: You edit the org. unit types directly in the database, but I'd advise against it. |
| 14:20 |
jcamins |
RoganH: I know, but I was picturing Joe Average worrying about shelving locations, and it amused me. |
| 14:20 |
Dyrcona |
It's one of those things where you have to know what you're doing, or you'll fubar your org tree. |
| 14:21 |
RoganH |
jcamins: :) |
| 14:21 |
cfarley |
I have two another things I wanted to mention. 1. the upgrade documentation for 2.6.4 has all the commands for 2.6.1, so if someone is a mindless zombie and just copies and pastes for the documentation it will not actually upgrade them to 2.6.4 |
| 14:22 |
cfarley |
not that I did that...:) |
| 14:23 |
bshum |
cfarley: Yeah, upgrade documentation and procedures could use some love. |
| 14:23 |
bshum |
They're generally written to be guides, not exact steps. Given that we're not updating them thoroughly. Add that to the long list of "we could use more volunteers for that" :\ |
| 14:24 |
cfarley |
Also the troubleshooting guide linked from the bottom of the installation instructions is also outdated and uses "/openils/bin/osrf_ctl.sh" |
| 14:24 |
Dyrcona |
Add to that that every system ends up being different, 'cause someone downloaded something in a different place, etc. |
| 14:25 |
Dyrcona |
cfarley: That last one is worthy of a documentation bug, methinks. |
| 14:25 |
bshum |
Definitely. |
| 14:25 |
bshum |
Admittedly a pretty old page too |
| 14:25 |
cfarley |
The guide has helped me out many times, updated or not. |
| 14:25 |
bshum |
Last changed 2012-10-15, bleh |
| 14:26 |
bshum |
And it's only in the 1.6 docs |
| 14:26 |
bshum |
This is probably something that needs porting to the master documentation |
| 14:26 |
bshum |
And relinked |
| 14:27 |
Dyrcona |
Oh. I don't condone anything other than the README for installation, but I'm pretty much alone in that. |
| 14:27 |
cfarley |
Thank you all, you have been very helpful. |
| 14:27 |
cfarley |
All my users have been complaining that they can't place hold, now we'll see how many of them actually use it. |
| 14:28 |
|
sarabee joined #evergreen |
| 14:28 |
RoganH |
Helpful? Take that back, people will lose their jobs over this! (sorry, obviously wanting to channel Groucho today) |
| 14:29 |
bshum |
cfarley++ # good luck, hope it goes better for your users :) |
| 14:29 |
cfarley |
RoganH: don't worry you weren't helpful at all. |
| 14:29 |
cfarley |
:) |
| 14:29 |
Dyrcona |
The Unhelp Desk? |
| 14:29 |
RoganH |
cfarley: thank you |
| 14:29 |
RoganH |
Have you tried turning it off and back on again? |
| 14:30 |
RoganH |
(sadly that does actually fix it a lot of the time) |
| 14:31 |
Dyrcona |
@dunno |
| 14:31 |
pinesol_green |
Dyrcona: Message root @ server God....Universe going down for reboot.... |
| 14:31 |
Dyrcona |
Not the one I wanted, but it will have to do. |
| 14:31 |
RoganH |
@dunno |
| 14:31 |
pinesol_green |
RoganH: http://scientopia.org/blogs/scicurious/files/2013/03/cousin-it.png |
| 14:31 |
RoganH |
404 on that one now |
| 14:33 |
cfarley |
One more quick question, is it possible (or advisible) to enable Volumes and Copies on a Catelog and not use systems or branches? |
| 14:33 |
|
nhilton joined #evergreen |
| 14:35 |
RoganH |
I'm concerned I'm not grokking what you're asking but volumes / copies aren't directly related to your org unit setup. |
| 14:35 |
RoganH |
So, yes. |
| 14:35 |
Dyrcona |
cfarley: Not sure I understand the question. Are you asking if you could just use the consortium as your only org. unit, the answer is a qualified yes. |
| 14:36 |
cfarley |
So I'm saying, hide everything below the catelog and effectively ignore them. |
| 14:37 |
Dyrcona |
Yes, but a lot of things expect there to be a tree and go up and down the tree looking for settings, etc. |
| 14:37 |
Dyrcona |
So, 1 mistake can throw that off. |
| 14:37 |
cfarley |
I see, maybe I'll have to do some testing |
| 14:38 |
Dyrcona |
If all you do is allow the top org unit type to have volumes/copies and users, and then just use that org unit type as your only org. unit, you should be OK. |
| 14:39 |
Dyrcona |
Testing is always good, preferably in a separate installation from production. |
| 14:55 |
cfarley |
I just noticed that my Catelog and system levels are greyed out in the Pickup location dropdown box on the place hold screen. Does anyone know what is needed to get these enabled? |
| 14:57 |
bshum |
cfarley: I believe that's controlled via the type of organization unit that's employed. There's a flag on the org unit type that sets it as allowing volumes and copies. If the unit type doesn't allow that, then they're typically not eligible as hold pickup locations. |
| 14:57 |
bshum |
Generally speaking, it's assumed in the stock setup that the top level and system levels do not actually house copies of materials. |
| 15:01 |
cfarley |
bshum:Still greyed out after enabling volume and copies, rerunning autogen and apache. |
| 15:02 |
bshum |
Be careful about turning on that option though, cause it means that catalogers can create volumes/copies in those org units if they have the permissions to do so. And you could end up with stuff cataloged and owned at the wrong levels of the library |
| 15:02 |
Dyrcona |
cfarley: Any time you mess with org units, you have to run autogen.sh. |
| 15:02 |
mmorgan |
bshum: Is it the "Can have volumes and copies" or the "Can Have Users" that controls what shows as a pickup location? |
| 15:02 |
Dyrcona |
And, you should use the -u option when you do so. |
| 15:02 |
bshum |
mmorgan: My expectation is that it's the can have volumes/copies |
| 15:03 |
bshum |
Based on what I remember from the tt2 files for hold placement |
| 15:03 |
RoganH |
bshum: I think you meant "you _will_ end up with stuff cataloged and owned at the wrong levels of the library" |
| 15:03 |
Dyrcona |
If you only setup 1 org unit, then you can't have wrong levels of the library. :) |
| 15:03 |
Dyrcona |
It's a bad idea to go messing with that after you've got a working system, though. |
| 15:04 |
RoganH |
Dyrcona++ |
| 15:46 |
Dyrcona |
@dunno |
| 15:46 |
pinesol_green |
Dyrcona: Go away, or I'll replace you with a very small shell script! |
| 16:29 |
* mmorgan |
curses lp 1368754 |
| 16:29 |
pinesol_green |
Launchpad bug 1368754 in Evergreen "Adding copy locations in staff client allows empty name field" (affected: 3, heat: 14) [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1368754 |
| 17:01 |
|
nhilton_ joined #evergreen |
| 17:02 |
|
pie_ joined #evergreen |
| 17:02 |
pie_ |
Hey guys, has anyone ever used usemarcon or have access to some conversion tables/rulesets? |
| 17:03 |
|
mrpeters left #evergreen |
| 17:07 |
pinesol_green |
Incoming from qatests: Test Success - http://testing.evergreen-ils.org/~live/test.html <http://testing.evergreen-ils.org/~live/test.html> |
| 17:08 |
|
mmorgan left #evergreen |
| 17:37 |
|
nhilton joined #evergreen |
| 18:34 |
|
RBecker joined #evergreen |
| 20:36 |
|
rjackson-home joined #evergreen |
| 20:57 |
|
edoceo joined #evergreen |
| 22:07 |
|
bmills joined #evergreen |
| 23:14 |
|
RBecker joined #evergreen |
