[OPEN-ILS-DEV] Holds selection_depth Best sort order usage

[Josh Stompro]

Hello, I'm trying to understand all the best hold sort order options in order to document them, and I'm stuck on Depth, which I believe is selection depth.

I  don't understand why it would be useful to use the selection depth in the sort.  The depth doesn't seem to have much to do with how a copy relates to a hold as far as priority goes.  Can someone that uses it explain why it is useful? Using hard boundaries, all the selection depths should be the same for valid holds.  Using soft boundaries the depth would change depending on copy availability, but I don't get why a hold should get higher priority if there are no copies within its boundary area.

If the Depth is used as a sort, it sorts holds with a selection depth of 0 (consortium) above those with a depth of 1 (system) or 2 (branch).  What is the logic of preferring holds that are broader over holds that are narrower.  Is it supposed to be a descending sort?  It looks like back when FIFO was an option, the sort was DESC, but now it is unspecified, so it is ASC.. Is that a bug?

Old FIFO sort - http://git.evergreen-ils.org/?p=Evergreen.git;a=blob;f=Open-ILS/src/perlmods/OpenILS/Application/Storage/Publisher/action.pm;h=315a7bc2d2bafc64d6982ff1786b33072c62708a#l289

New - http://git.evergreen-ils.org/?p=Evergreen.git;a=blob;f=Open-ILS/src/perlmods/lib/OpenILS/Application/Storage/Publisher/action.pm;hb=HEAD#l30


Thanks
Josh


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-dev/attachments/20151111/d3e9be43/attachment.html>