| Summary: | Record matching rule code should be unique | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Koha | Reporter: | David Cook <dcook> |
| Component: | MARC Bibliographic record staging/import | Assignee: | Bugs List <koha-bugs> |
| Status: | NEW --- | QA Contact: | Testopia <testopia> |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P5 - low | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
| Change sponsored?: | --- | Patch complexity: | --- |
| Documentation contact: | Documentation submission: | ||
| Text to go in the release notes: | Version(s) released in: | ||
| Circulation function: | |||
|
Description
David Cook
2020-08-06 08:02:58 UTC
Of course, fixing this is easier said than done, as we need to make sure that any existing databases don't have duplicate marc_matcher codes... I am not sure if I see the need as the table has a primary key that is unique and that key is used for example when you use the matching rules with the command line scripts. We don't keep people from naming other things the same - it seems if they do, that's not ideal, but doesn't necessarily need a code solution. (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #2) > I am not sure if I see the need as the table has a primary key that is > unique and that key is used for example when you use the matching rules with > the command line scripts. > The primary key isn't very friendly though. I've done some work with matching rules (before discarding it), and working with the codes is much nicer. It's also possible that you could delete your record matching rule and re-create it, and then your old primary key is gone, but your code could still be the same. > We don't keep people from naming other things the same - it seems if they > do, that's not ideal, but doesn't necessarily need a code solution. Well, this would be a database schema change rather than a code solution per se. It would just be making a unique key for the code column. (The code solution would just be necessary at update time before creating the unique key to prevent fatal database errors.) Code in the GUI would be needed as well. (In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #4) > Code in the GUI would be needed as well. Ah touché. I forgot about that part [U+1F605] |