[OPEN-ILS-DEV] Adding copies in Evergreen

[Robert Soulliere]

We imported our records into Evergreen and can view them in the staff
client, but I have one more hurdle to get over. I ran the
quick_metarecord_map.sql and it seemed to run OK with the output:

BEGIN
ALTER TABLE
TRUNCATE TABLE
TRUNCATE TABLE
INSERT 0 37000
INSERT 0 39327
ALTER TABLE
COMMIT
[then the vacuuming stuff]

but the copies are not added.

Here are my questions:

1. Does this seem like to correct output if we imported 39327 records?

2. Was there a preliminary step I am missing where I need to add the
branch information to a file so that this step knows where to add the
copies?  

Thanks,
Robert  








From: Josh Stompro <stomproj at larl.org>
Date: Thursday, August 14, 2008 10:28 am
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] DB schema documentation: Patch for
040.schema.asset.sql
To: open-ils-dev at list.georgialibraries.org

> Mike Rylander wrote:
> > On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 5:19 PM, Josh Stompro <stomproj at larl.org> 
> wrote:>   re
> >> I'm trying to understand the database design, and I find that I 
> get hung up
> >> on figuring out how exactly certain columns are used or how 
> tables are
> >> related.  Finding where it is used in the source and 
> understanding what is
> >> going on is time consuming when I just want general info.
> >>
> >>     
> >
> > The most direct description is probably embodied in the fm_IDL.xml
> > file.  When I need to reference something quickly that's generally
> > where I look first.
> >
> >   
> I found the descriptions in fm_IDL.xml to be too brief in many 
> cases to 
> really help me understand what was going on with many of the tables 
> and 
> fields.  Now that I have looked at the design for a while, the 
> fm_IDL.xml makes more sense, but looking at it with no experience 
> it was 
> too brief to be a one stop shop of information.  
> 
> >> There is documentation scattered around in the wiki about 
> different sections
> >> of the database, but I don't think they are always up to date or 
> complete.>>  The ERD that is listed in the wiki
> >> (http://open-ils.org/documentation/evergreen_1.1.3_erd.html) 
> seems to be
> >> more of a pretty print of the schema and not what I would 
> consider an entity
> >> relationship diagram since there are no diagrams.
> >>     
> >
> > There are internal anchor links for defined fkeys, but, yeah ... no
> > diagrams.  I have generated some dia diagrams in the past, and
> > attempted generating UML, but there are some parts of the schema
> > (particularly in the money schema) that are not modeled well by 
> those> attempts.  pg_autodoc was used to generate that html as well 
> as the
> > dia and UML (which aren't posted).
> >
> >   
> After I added SQL COMMENT ON's for all the tables and rows, all 
> that 
> information was included in the html outline created by pg_autodoc. 
> I 
> think it makes everything much easier to understand for someone who 
> is 
> just looking at it for the first time.  When I tried to play with 
> the 
> DIA file created by pg_autodoc, Dia would think about working for a 
> while, and then crash, so I didn't have much success with that.
> >> How do the core devs feel about commenting up the sql files?  It 
> wouldn't>> look as pretty but it would be a one stop place for 
> questions about how the
> >> database is designed for those that have a question about what 
> column X is
> >> for.
> >> Would a patch that did something like this be accepted/welcomed?
> >>
> >>     
> >
> > It would be accepted with open arms!  There is some of that in there
> > now, but not enough, and much of it is out of date (and not
> > appropriate for in-db comments, really).  If you have any questions
> > about specific column use then please fire away at this list.
> >
> >   
> I have attached a patch to 040.schema.asset.sql that includes some 
> standard block comments for each table, and SQL COMMENT ON 
> statements 
> for each table and field.  I would like some feedback on what 
> people 
> think of this documentation method.  On one hand, it keeps the 
> documentation close to the source which should facilitate it being 
> kept 
> up to date.  On the other hand it adds quite a bit of bulk to the 
> schema 
> files.  And let me know what you think of how I worded the 
> comments, I  
> didn't see any comments for me to base mine on.  I will include the 
> DCO 
> later after feedback and if the patch is still wanted.
> Josh
> 
> -- 
> Lake Agassiz Regional Library - Moorhead MN larl.org
> Josh Stompro               | Office 218.233.3757 EXT-139
> LARL Network Administrator | Cell 218.790.2110	
> 
> 


This E-mail contains privileged and confidential information intended
only for the individual or entity named in the message.  If the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible
to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication
is prohibited.  If this communication was received in error, please
notify the sender by reply E-mail immediately, and delete and destroy
the original message.