From 19ce4092cc02ab91b34d0ffe6b3ae3606de445b3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Robin Sheat Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 18:33:00 +1300 Subject: [PATCH] Bug 11947 - renumber reserves when hold is confirmed Currently when a reserve is moved to "waiting" status because it's acknowledged on checkin, the reserve priorities aren't renumbered. This causes things to go a bit haywire in the UI, in particular, some reserves can unjustly end up with priority 1 when they shouldn't. It also seemed to mess with the logic of who should get it next, but I didn't look too closely at that. This patch forces a renumbering so that all the priorities remain copacetic. Test plan: * have a few borrowers, say 4. * have a biblio with a single item (you can scale this up, it should work just the same.) * issue the item to borrower A * have borrowers B, C, and D place a hold on the item * return the item, acknowledge that it'll be put aside for B. * view the holds on the item. Without the patch: * the hold priorities in the UI end up being "waiting, 2, 1" when they should be "waiting, 1, 2". * in the database "reserves" table, they're really "0, 2, 3" when they should be "0, 1, 2". With the patch: * the hold priorities in the UI end up being "waiting, 1, 2" * in the database, they're "0, 1, 2" [New version, including test case.] --- C4/Reserves.pm | 2 +- t/db_dependent/Reserves.t | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/C4/Reserves.pm b/C4/Reserves.pm index 7a914e3..122144d 100644 --- a/C4/Reserves.pm +++ b/C4/Reserves.pm @@ -1296,7 +1296,7 @@ sub ModReserveAffect { $sth = $dbh->prepare($query); $sth->execute( $itemnumber, $borrowernumber,$biblionumber); _koha_notify_reserve( $itemnumber, $borrowernumber, $biblionumber ) if ( !$transferToDo && !$already_on_shelf ); - + _FixPriority( { biblionumber => $biblionumber } ); if ( C4::Context->preference("ReturnToShelvingCart") ) { CartToShelf( $itemnumber ); } diff --git a/t/db_dependent/Reserves.t b/t/db_dependent/Reserves.t index 4b0058c..bd6fb4a 100755 --- a/t/db_dependent/Reserves.t +++ b/t/db_dependent/Reserves.t @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ use Modern::Perl; -use Test::More tests => 31; +use Test::More tests => 34; use MARC::Record; use DateTime::Duration; @@ -199,6 +199,30 @@ my ($itemnum_cpl, $itemnum_fpl); barcode => 'bug10272_FPL' } , $bibnum2); +# Ensure that priorities are numbered correcly when a hold is moved to waiting +# (bug 11947) +$dbh->do("DELETE FROM reserves WHERE biblionumber=?",undef,($bibnum2)); +AddReserve('RPL', $requesters{'RPL'}, $bibnum2, + $constraint, $bibitems, 1, $resdate, $expdate, $notes, + $title, $checkitem, $found); +AddReserve('FPL', $requesters{'FPL'}, $bibnum2, + $constraint, $bibitems, 2, $resdate, $expdate, $notes, + $title, $checkitem, $found); +AddReserve('CPL', $requesters{'CPL'}, $bibnum2, + $constraint, $bibitems, 3, $resdate, $expdate, $notes, + $title, $checkitem, $found); +ModReserveAffect($itemnum_cpl, $requesters{'RPL'}, 0); + +# Now it should have different priorities. +my ($count, $title_reserves) = GetReservesFromBiblionumber($bibnum2); +# Sort by reserve number in case the database gives us oddly ordered results +my @reserves = sort { $a->{reserve_id} <=> $b->{reserve_id} } @$title_reserves; +is($reserves[0]{priority}, 0, 'Item is correctly waiting'); +is($reserves[1]{priority}, 1, 'Item is correctly priority 1'); +is($reserves[2]{priority}, 2, 'Item is correctly priority 2'); + + +$dbh->do("DELETE FROM reserves WHERE biblionumber=?",undef,($bibnum2)); AddReserve('RPL', $requesters{'RPL'}, $bibnum2, $constraint, $bibitems, 1, $resdate, $expdate, $notes, $title, $checkitem, $found); -- 1.8.3.2