[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling - PINES hold white-paper

Thu Sep 10 09:20:53 EDT 2015

Thanks Grace, I understand what the document is saying now.  I was just confused by the idea that it was possible for the proximity to be setup based on geography, since the Org Unit Proximity Adjustments were not available then.

Thanks for the flow chart, we were shown that early on by our trainer, and I’ve wanted to get another look at it but I haven’t remembered to ask.

Is the source for that available?  Would it be possible to add that image to the official docs?
Thanks

Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director

From: Open-ils-general [mailto:open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Grace Dunbar
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2015 8:47 AM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling - PINES hold white-paper

Josh,
Often, public library hierarchies follow loose geographic boundaries, like counties.  When Evergreen was launched, the best hold selection sort order feature and the proximity adjustment feature were not part of the Evergreen software.  At the time, org unit groups were the best representation the software could make of geographic groups.
Also, attached is a diagram that I created for PINES and the community back in 2010 to try to diagram how the distinct parts of holds work together (targeting/opportunistic capture/re-targeting/stalling).  Hopefully, this may be of some help to you.  Note that the diagram has "" around "checked-in" because there are several actions that can trigger opportunistic capture such as checking items status, etc.

Cheers!
Grace

On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Hardy, Elaine <ehardy at georgialibraries.org<mailto:ehardy at georgialibraries.org>> wrote:
Josh,

It is actually explained earlier in the document. Proximity is one of two key misunderstandings (see numbered page 22 (26th page of document)). The complete sentence on numbered page 23 (27th page) is:

Due to a miscommunication between staff at Equinox Software and GPLS, proximity was defined as geographic rather than organizational.

Proximity was never geographic but was misunderstood to be so. It has always been organizational. This misapprehension was one of the issues that led to the belief amongst PINES libraries that holds didn’t work.

I often use the term current when referring to Evergreen functionality since it can change in the future as well as differing from past functionality.

Elaine

J. Elaine Hardy
PINES & Collaborative Projects Manager
Georgia Public Library Service
1800 Century Place, Ste 150
Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304

404.235.7128<tel:404.235.7128>
404.235.7201<tel:404.235.7201>, fax
ehardy at georgialibraries.org<mailto:ehardy at georgialibraries.org>
www.georgialibraries.org<http://www.georgialibraries.org>
www.georgialibraries.org/pines<http://www.georgialibraries.org/pines>

From: Open-ils-general [mailto:open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org<mailto:open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org>] On Behalf Of Josh Stompro
Sent: Friday, September 04, 2015 2:01 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling - PINES hold white-paper

Hello Elaine, I’ve been reading through this report, and I’m curious about one section, hopefully this isn’t explained a little further down.

http://pines.georgialibraries.org/sites/default/files/files/Holds%20White%20Paper.pdf

On page 27, this statement is made “proximity was defined as geographic rather than organizational (see Figure 8).”

Then on page 28 there is a bullet point that says

“Current proximity is organizational not geographic.“

So was the proximity defined as geographic, then switched to organizational, which then caused issues because people were used to the geographic method?  Is that what that is saying?  Or is it saying that the perception was that proximity was based on geographic distance vs what it actually was (organizational distance).

Thanks

Josh Stompro - LARL IT Director

From: Open-ils-general [mailto:open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Hardy, Elaine
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2015 11:17 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling

We did some pretty extensive research on holds in 2013. While it is PINES policy centric, it might answer other questions you may have. It is available at  http://pines.georgialibraries.org/holds-white-paper

Elaine

J. Elaine Hardy
PINES & Collaborative Projects Manager
Georgia Public Library Service
1800 Century Place, Ste 150
Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304

404.235.7128<tel:404.235.7128>
404.235.7201<tel:404.235.7201>, fax
ehardy at georgialibraries.org<mailto:ehardy at georgialibraries.org>
www.georgialibraries.org<http://www.georgialibraries.org>
www.georgialibraries.org/pines<http://www.georgialibraries.org/pines>

From: Open-ils-general [mailto:open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Joan Kranich
Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2015 2:03 PM
To: 'Evergreen Discussion Group' <open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org<mailto:open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org>>
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling

Hi Elaine,

Thank you for the response.  I did not realize that stalling does not take into consideration whether or not the pickup library owns a copy or not.  I appreciate the answers to my question.

Joan

Joan Kranich
C/W MARS Member Services
jkranich at cwmars.org<mailto:jkranich at cwmars.org>
508-755-3323 ext. 21<tel:508-755-3323%20ext.%2021>

From: Open-ils-general [mailto:open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Hardy, Elaine
Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2015 12:38 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling

Unless things have changed in the last versions, stalling is only for opportunistic capture. Stalling does not apply to the holds targeter. During the stall, the targeter process can identify a copy outside the pickup library and it can be captured by the owning library and transited for the hold. Also, stalling does not take into consideration whether or not the pickup library owns a copy or not. Opportunistic capture is stalled regardless.

Elaine

J. Elaine Hardy
PINES & Collaborative Projects Manager
Georgia Public Library Service
1800 Century Place, Ste 150
Atlanta, Ga. 30345-4304

404.235.7128<tel:404.235.7128>
404.235.7201<tel:404.235.7201>, fax
ehardy at georgialibraries.org<mailto:ehardy at georgialibraries.org>
www.georgialibraries.org<http://www.georgialibraries.org>
www.georgialibraries.org/pines<http://www.georgialibraries.org/pines>

From: Open-ils-general [mailto:open-ils-general-bounces at list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Joan Kranich
Sent: Thursday, September 03, 2015 12:16 PM
To: 'Evergreen Discussion Group'
Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Soft Stalling

Hi,

I have a question about the Library Setting Soft Stalling.

If we retarget Holds every 24 hours and set the soft stalling for 2 days will the Hold that has targeted the pickup location’s copy target another available/eligible copy in 24 hours or will the Hold continue to target the pickup location’s copy until after the 2 days stalling period?

I have found the soft stalling is more effective if set system wide than if it set for an individual library.

Thanks for any information you can share.

Joan

Joan Kranich
C/W MARS Member Services
jkranich at cwmars.org<mailto:jkranich at cwmars.org>
508-755-3323 ext. 21<tel:508-755-3323%20ext.%2021>

--
Grace Dunbar, Vice President
Equinox Software, Inc.  -  The Open Source Experts
gdunbar at esilibrary.com<mailto:gdunbar at esilibrary.com>
1-877-OPEN-ILS    www.esilibrary.com<http://www.esilibrary.com>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20150910/f00f251a/attachment-0001.html>