[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Search Filter Groups

[Elizabeth B. Thomsen]

Thanks, Bill!  We probably should have been able to guess that syntax. 
We use copy location groups extensively here for scopes, and have to 
edit them frequently when libraries rearrange their collections and add 
new copy locations, so not having to remember to add these in two places 
would definitely be helpful.

One more question on the speed of search issue -- is there a difference 
here between using a copy location in a search filter group and using 
one as a scope in the location selector?  We currently have some 
location group scopes that include very long lists of copy locations, 
and don't have speed problems with them.

For example, we have a copy location group that's called All Children's 
Locations in the location selector and it works fine.  Would there be 
any reason that it would be slower if used in as in a search filter 
group for audience as an alternative to working with the MARC audience 
fixed field?

We're trying to test these, but we're working on our training system 
which is different hardware and obviously different load.  We're 
enthusiastic about the power of search filter groups but a little wary 
about possible performance issues.

On 7/11/2013 9:04 AM, Bill Erickson wrote:
> Hi Elizabeth,
>
> You can use Copy Location Groups within Search Filter Groups.  The
> syntax is "location_groups(1,2,3,...)".  They would certainly be easier
> to maintain, particularly if your location groups are already
> configured, but they would have no effect either way on the speed of the
> search as compared to bare copy locations.
>
> -b
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Elizabeth B. Thomsen <et at noblenet.org
> <mailto:et at noblenet.org>> wrote:
>
>     We're working on improving our TPAC with new formats and advanced
>     filters using search filter groups, and would be interested to see
>     what others have done with these.  Is anyone willing to share?
>
>     We especially like the ability to mix and match MARC data and copy
>     locations, but we're concerned about possible performance issues if
>     we create filter items using long lists of copy locations.  Has
>     anyone had any experience with this?  Is there any way to use copy
>     location groups rather than individual copy locations?  This would
>     be easier for us to maintain, but would there also be performance
>     advantages if this were possible?
>
>     --
>     Elizabeth Thomsen, Member Services Manager
>     NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange
>     26 Cherry Hill Drive
>     Danvers MA 01923
>     E-mail: et at noblenet.org <mailto:et at noblenet.org>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Bill Erickson
> | Senior Software Developer
> | phone: 877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
> | email: berick at esilibrary.com <mailto:berick at esilibrary.com>
> | web: http://esilibrary.com
> | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source
>


-- 
Elizabeth Thomsen, Member Services Manager
NOBLE: North of Boston Library Exchange
26 Cherry Hill Drive
Danvers MA 01923
E-mail: et at noblenet.org