`priority` smallint(6) default NULL but it cannot be null
Created attachment 99572 [details] [review] Bug 24722: Enforce NOT NULL constraint on reserves.priority This field is never NULL and must always be equal to an integer.
Created attachment 99576 [details] [review] Bug 24722: Enforce NOT NULL constraint on reserves.priority This field is never NULL and must always be equal to an integer.
Created attachment 99577 [details] [review] Bug 24722: Add test
Created attachment 99578 [details] [review] Bug 24722: DBIC changes
Created attachment 99595 [details] [review] Bug 24722: Enforce NOT NULL constraint on reserves.priority This field is never NULL and must always be equal to an integer. Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Created attachment 99596 [details] [review] Bug 24722: Add test Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Created attachment 99597 [details] [review] Bug 24722: DBIC changes Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com>
Good call.. I should have raised that before pushing the bug that fixed the priority not being set for SIP transactions.. Signing off.
Created attachment 99642 [details] [review] Bug 24722: Add atomicupdate file
This seems ok. Only wondering: should we be changing old_reserves as well? The table still has: `priority` smallint(6) default NULL, -- where in the queue the patron sits
Created attachment 100822 [details] [review] Bug 24722: Enforce NOT NULL constraint on reserves.priority This field is never NULL and must always be equal to an integer. Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com> Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Created attachment 100823 [details] [review] Bug 24722: Add test Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com> Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Created attachment 100824 [details] [review] Bug 24722: DBIC changes Signed-off-by: Martin Renvoize <martin.renvoize@ptfs-europe.com> Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Created attachment 100825 [details] [review] Bug 24722: Add atomicupdate file Signed-off-by: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer.83@web.de>
Created attachment 100860 [details] [review] Bug 24722: Same change for old_reserves.priority
(In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #10) > This seems ok. Only wondering: should we be changing old_reserves as well? > The table still has: > `priority` smallint(6) default NULL, -- where in the queue the patron sits Yes of course, thanks!
Nice work everyone! Pushed to master for 20.05
Created attachment 100945 [details] [review] Bug 24722: reserves.priority must default to 1 at DB level https://bugs.koha-community.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22821
Created attachment 100946 [details] [review] Bug 24722: reserves.priority must default to 1 at DB level