Removing dbh from one script, changing rollback in the other.
Schema is leading now.
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
- Remove expiration date calculation in C4::Letter since it's done
when setting the reserve waiting,
- remove expiration date calculation in circ/waitingreserves.pl. Use
the one in DB,
- add a new atomic update that calculate expiration date for
waiting reserves,
- add tests for days_foward function and fix the infinite loop.
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Andreas Hedström Mace <andreas.hedstrom.mace@sub.su.se>
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
This patch makes koha automatically set expiration date when reserves become
waitting. Also it adds a new syspref "ExcludeHolidaysFromMaxPickUpDelay" that allows to
take holidays into account while calculating expiration date.
Test plan:
- Install this patch and run updatedatabase.pl script,
- allow ExpireReservesMaxPickUpDelay in system preferences,
- set ReservesMaxPickUpDelay to 5.
- Place an hold on a checked out item and check in this item:
The hold's expiration date should be today + 5.
- Allow ExcludeHolidaysFromMaxPickUpDelay in system preferences,
- add holiday during this pickup delay period,
- Create a new hold and make it comes waitting:
The hold's expiration date should be today + 5 + number of closed
day(s).
Also:
- Check that ExpireReservesOnHolidays syspref works again
without ExcludeHolidaysFromMaxPickUpDelay.
- Check that cancel fees apply again if wanted.
Signed-off-by: sonia BOUIS <sonia.bouis@univ-lyon3.fr>
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
We are going out of scope here, but these tests need a branch/item.
Test plan:
Run the adjusted tests.
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Marc Véron <veron@veron.ch>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Test plan:
prove all these tests, they must all pass
Signed-off-by: Marc Véron <veron@veron.ch>
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Two discussions on koha-devel lead to the same conclusion:
biblioitems.marcxml should be moved out this table
- biblio and biblioitems
http://lists.koha-community.org/pipermail/koha-devel/2013-April/039239.html
- biblioitems.marcxml & biblioitems.marc / HUGE performance issue !
http://lists.koha-community.org/pipermail/koha-devel/2016-July/042821.html
There are several goals to do it:
- Performance
As Paul Poulain wrote, a simple query like
SELECT publicationyear, count(publicationyear) FROM biblioitems GROUP BY publicationyear;
takes more than 10min on a DB with more than 1M bibliographic records
but only 3sec (!) on the same DB without the biblioitems.marcxml field
Note that priori to this patch set, the biblioitems.marcxml was not
retrieved systematically, but was, at least, in
C4::Acquisition::GetOrdersByBiblionumber and C4::Acquisition::GetOrders
- Flexibility
Storing the marcxml in a specific table would allow use to store several
kind of metadata (USMARC, MARCXML, MIJ, etc.) and different formats (marcflavour)
- Clean code
It would be a first step toward Koha::MetadataRecord for bibliographic
records (not done in this patch set).
Test plan:
- Update the DBIC Schema
- Add / Edit / Delete / Import / Export bibliographic records
- Add items
- Reindex records using ES
- Confirm that the following scripts still work:
* misc/cronjobs/delete_records_via_leader.pl
* misc/migration_tools/build_oai_sets.pl
- Look at the reading history at the OPAC (opac-readingrecord.pl)
- At the OPAC, click on a tag, you must see the result
Note: Changes in Koha/OAI/Server/ListRecords.pm is planned on bug 15108.
Signed-off-by: Mason James <mtj@kohaaloha.com>
Signed-off-by: Josef Moravec <josef.moravec@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Zeno Tajoli <z.tajoli@cineca.it>
Signed-off-by: Nick Clemens <nick@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
This patch makes t/db_dependent/Holds/RevertWaitingStatus.t create
good sample data for its tests. It does so by creating a random
itemtype.
To test:
- Run
$ prove t/db_dependent/Holds/RevertWaitingStatus.t
=> FAIL: lots of warnings about "item-level_itypes set but no itemtype
set for item"
- Apply the patch
- Run:
$ prove t/db_dependent/Holds/RevertWaitingStatus.t
=> SUCCESS: Tests are green, and no warnings.
- Sign off :-D
Signed-off-by: Mark Tompsett <mtompset@hotmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@bugs.koha-community.org>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Some libraries would like to prevent patrons from placing holds on
items where there are other items available for the patron to
check out.
Test Plan:
1) Apply this patch
2) Browse to the circulation rules
3) Note the new option for "On shelf holds allowed"
4) Set the rule to "If all unavailable", set "item level holds" to allow
5) Find a patron/branch/itemtype applicable to this rule
6) Ensure at least one item on the record is available for the
patron to check out
7) Attempt to place a hold for the item
8) Note you cannot place the hold
9) Check the available item out to another patron
10) Note you can now place a hold for the first patron
Signed-off-by: Andreas Hedström Mace <andreas.hedstrom.mace@sub.su.se>
Works as intended!
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@bugs.koha-community.org>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Some libraries would like the ability to select the itemtype to request
when placing holds. For example, if a record has 3 copies of BookA and 3
copies of BookA in large print, this feature would allow a person to
place a hold on the record, but still be able to target only the Large
Print edition so that the first Large Print copy that becomes available
is targeted, rather than forcing the patron to select a particular copy
to hold.
Test Plan:
1) Apply this patch
2) Run updatedatabase.pl
3) Create a record with items of two or more itemtypes
4) Place a record level hold on the record while choosing one particular
itemtype
5) Check in an item from the record that is not of that itemtype
6) Notee it is not trapped for the hold
7) Check in an item from the record that does match the selected itemtype
8) Note the item is trapped for the hold
Signed-off-by: Andreas Hedström Mace <andreas.hedstrom.mace@sub.su.se>
Signed-off-by: Benjamin Rokseth <benjamin.rokseth@kul.oslo.kommune.no>
Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Some libraries would like to be able to limit hold filling to items that
match the pickup library for a hold based on the item's home or holding
library. The patron's home library should not affect whether a patron
can place the hold, instead the hold will only be fillable when an item
matching the pickup location becomes available.
Test Plan:
1) Apply this patch
2) Run updatedatabase.pl
3) Note the new "Hold pickup library match" rules for "checkout, hold,
and return policy" and for "holds policy by item type"
4) Set the policy to "item's holding library"
5) Place a hold where the item's holding branch does not match
the pickup branch
6) Check in the item
7) Note it is not trapped for the hold
8) Update the item's holding branch to match the pickup branch
8) Check in the item
9) Note the item is trapped for the hold
10) Repeat steps 4-9 but for home branch instead
Signed-off-by: Hector Castro <hector.hecaxmmx@gmail.com>
Works as described
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Tests assume that the branchcodes CPL/MPL/etc. already exist in the DB.
If they need them, they should create them.
Test plan:
Execute the differente test files on a DB without any branchcode or
at least without CPL/MPL branches.
Confirm that the tests pass.
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl>
Signed-off-by: Kyle M Hall <kyle@bywatersolutions.com>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@bugs.koha-community.org>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@theke.io>
- use Modern::Perl;
- fix a typo
- remove an old comment
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@gmail.com>
This feature will allow libraries to specify that, when an item is returned,
a local hold may be given priority for fulfillment even though it is
of lower priority in the list of unfilled holds.
This feature has three settings:
* LocalHoldsPriority, which enables the feature
* LocalHoldsPriorityPatronControl, which selects for either tha patron's
home library, or the patron's pickup library for the hold
* LocalHoldsPriorityItemControl, which selects for either the item's
holding library, or home library.
So, this feature can "give priority for filling holds to
patrons whose (home library|pickup library) matches the item's
(home library|holding library)"
Test Plan:
1) Apply this patch
2) Run t/db_dependent/Holds/LocalHoldsPriority.t
Signed-off-by: Joel Sasse <jsasse@plumcreeklibrary.net>
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@gmail.com>
Without this patch, the following warning appears:
t/db_dependent/Holds/RevertWaitingStatus.t .. Subroutine
C4::Context::userenv redefined at
t/db_dependent/Holds/RevertWaitingStatus.t line 25.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@gmail.com>
1) Test record has 1 single item, checked out to patron X
2) Place 3 holds for patrons A, B and C, all title level hold this time
A, B, C, item branches and staff branch are the same.
3) Return item, confirm hold
4) Confirm item is now waiting for patron A
Priorities are: A = Waiting, B = 1, C = 2
5) Open patron account of user B, checkout book
Koha asks: Item X has been waiting for patron A... Revert
waiting status
Confirm.
6) Check priorities:
Hold list shows: A = 1, C = 1
Database says: A = 1, C = 3
7) Apply this patch
8) Repeat steps 1-6
9) Note the priorities are correct
Signed-off-by: Owen Leonard <oleonard@myacpl.org>
Test plan correctly predicts the error and the correction made by the
patch.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com>
Signed-off-by: Tomas Cohen Arazi <tomascohen@gmail.com>
