Bug 26295

Summary: Merge bib records - rebuild Zebra
Product: Koha Reporter: Fiona Borthwick <fiona.borthwick>
Component: DocumentationAssignee: Katrin Fischer <katrin.fischer>
Status: RESOLVED MOVED QA Contact: Testopia <testopia>
Severity: enhancement    
Priority: P5 - low    
Version: Main   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   
GIT URL: Initiative type: ---
Sponsorship status: --- Comma delimited list of Sponsors:
Crowdfunding goal: 0 Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact: Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:
Circulation function:

Description Fiona Borthwick 2020-08-25 09:41:28 UTC
https://koha-community.org/manual//20.11/en/html/cataloging.html#merging-records

There is a paragraph that reads:

"Important

It is important to rebuild your zebra index immediately after merging records. If a search is performed for a record which has been deleted Koha will present the patrons with an error in the OPAC."

One of our customers queried this as obviously having to rebuild the zebra index following one simple merge is not very efficient. It would appear that standard indexing deals with the merged records as standard now.

A catalogue search on the terms in question (to locate the two records) will now only find the master record following the merge and there is no retrieval of the second record that has been merged.

If a rebuild is no longer required, then it might be a good idea to remove this warning from the manual?
Comment 1 Katrin Fischer 2020-08-25 10:04:52 UTC
I believe this might have been badly phrased not meaning "full reindex", but the normal incremental one. And maybe dating back to times where this was not done by the indexer (almost immediately), but could take up to a view minutes? 

I think I'd just delete the part about the importance of indexing - every change requires an index to take effect in search and deleting of records is not different to a merge... pointing it out here explicitly doesn't seem necessary. What do you think?
Comment 2 Fiona Borthwick 2020-08-25 10:20:37 UTC
(In reply to Katrin Fischer from comment #1)
> I believe this might have been badly phrased not meaning "full reindex", but
> the normal incremental one. And maybe dating back to times where this was
> not done by the indexer (almost immediately), but could take up to a view
> minutes? 
> 
> I think I'd just delete the part about the importance of indexing - every
> change requires an index to take effect in search and deleting of records is
> not different to a merge... pointing it out here explicitly doesn't seem
> necessary. What do you think?

I agree Katrin!
Comment 3 Katrin Fischer 2020-08-30 19:07:10 UTC
I've submitted a merge request to the manual for this change.