https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=39558 --- Comment #5 from Marcel de Rooy <m.de.rooy@rijksmuseum.nl> --- (In reply to Nick Clemens (kidclamp) from comment #4)
(In reply to Marcel de Rooy from comment #3)
We are discussing this on bug 39397 too. I think that we should normally leave the timestamp update to sql. If the specific table changed, change the timestamp. If not, dont touch it.
Moving this to In discussion too.
The current situation is weird though, because it's not just 'did them marc change' - but 'did a specific field we have mapped changed'
Right now we have to check three tables to decide if a "record" has had changes.
The need for this comes from syncing with outside systems - 'biblios' is the endpoint for this - joining to the 'biblio_metadata' table makes any queries more expensive - with the timestamps in sync we can do a simple query to fetch the recently updated records.
Is there a use case to know that the record was updated, but not the title or author fields?
Not sure about the last sentence, you can update a record and not touch the title or author, right? In most cases it seems to me that you just need to check biblio_metadata or items. There is an index on the primary key for biblio_metadata. Why look at biblio or biblioitems? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.