http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10455 Magnus Enger <magnus@enger.priv.no> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |In Discussion CC| |magnus@enger.priv.no --- Comment #1 from Magnus Enger <magnus@enger.priv.no> --- The data might be the same, but the format is different, because biblioitems.marc is iso2709, right? I seem to remember someone saying that we should keep the iso2709 in biblioitems.marc, because if you want to export e.g. 500k records in iso2709 format, transforming all those records from marcxml on the fly would be *really* heavy. But I might be wrong... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10455 Galen Charlton <gmcharlt@gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|In Discussion |ASSIGNED --- Comment #3 from Galen Charlton <gmcharlt@gmail.com> --- (In reply to Magnus Enger from comment #1)

I seem to remember someone saying that we should keep the iso2709 in biblioitems.marc, because if you want to export e.g. 500k records in iso2709 format, transforming all those records from marcxml on the fly would be *really* heavy. But I might be wrong...

Sure, if you want ISO2709 and are starting from MARCXML, converting to ISO2709 for an export will consume a bit more CPU than dumping pre-existing ISO2709 directly... but (a) the cost of conversion is not that much, (b) exports are relatively infrequent operations, (c) and as such, better to pay the cost during exports than to (admittedly slightly) slow down the operation of saving or modifying a bib record. I'm taking of removing the "In Discussion" status in the hopes that somebody takes up writing a patch. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10455 Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jonathan.druart@biblibre.co | |m --- Comment #4 from Jonathan Druart <jonathan.druart@biblibre.com> --- biblioitems.marc is used by misc/cronjobs/MARC21_parse_test.pl. Does this script still used? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10455 David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dcook@prosentient.com.au --- Comment #5 from David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> --- (In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #4)

biblioitems.marc is used by misc/cronjobs/MARC21_parse_test.pl. Does this script still used?

I've never even heard of this script before, so I don't think that we use it. However, I suppose it's possible that someone uses it? Could we just remove the references to biblioitems.marc in this one script? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10455 --- Comment #7 from Magnus Enger <magnus@libriotech.no> --- (In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #6)

Yes we could, if nobody uses the --fix option:

243 -f --fix Replace biblioitems.marcxml from data in marc field, default OFF

The script was added in 2009 and not touched since: http://git.koha-community.org/gitweb/?p=koha.git;a=commit;h=84ff3747b80d4291...

From the commit message:

"When marcxml cannot be parsed into a MARC::Record object, the biblio is undisplayable and it obviously breaks many features in Koha. This script can test to parse every marcxml, and alert on failures. Optionally, the marcxml can be replaced from the marc field." Didn't we at some point switch from treating marc (ISO2709) as the authoritative format, to treating marcxml as the authoritative format? I'd say loosing the ability to recreate marcxml from marc is no big deal. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10455 --- Comment #9 from David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> --- Just noticed that http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=11084 is using biblioitems.marc as a string... that would block this bug... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.

http://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=10455 --- Comment #11 from David Cook <dcook@prosentient.com.au> --- (In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #10)

I have just used it right now. For testing purpose I have removed the marcxml field. Using --fix, I was able to repopulate it from the marc.

But why did you remove the marcxml field at all? :p -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.