[Koha-bugs] [Bug 22700] Make biblio_metadata prefetchable from Koha::Biblio

[bugzilla-daemon at bugs.koha-community.org]

https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=22700

--- Comment #13 from Tomás Cohen Arazi <tomascohen at gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Druart from comment #10)
> (In reply to Tomás Cohen Arazi from comment #5)
> > (In reply to Martin Renvoize from comment #4)
> > > Comment on attachment 87943 [details] [review] [review] [review]
> > > Bug 22700: Make biblio_metadata prefetchable from Koha::Biblio
> > > 
> > > Review of attachment 87943 [details] [review] [review] [review]:
> > > -----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 
> > > This doesn't feel entirely correct yet I'm afraid.. though I'm not close
> > > enough to the biblio_metadatas table to entirely understand whether we
> > > expect it to every be a more than one-to-one relationship with the biblio's
> > > table.
> > 
> > It is a one-to-one relationship.
> 
> Hum, really?
> If it was, we would have not create a new table for that.
> We could have different representation of the record (MARC, MARCXML, etc.),
> for different MARC profiles.
> IMO this is completely wrong, but I may have missed a previous discussion.

What would you say is the source of truth if there were more than one
representation? I'm not against some vaccine of different representativa, just
saying many places assume THE metadata is the source for populating other
columns and our design doesn't consider a way to determine which representation
is the one to be used as basis.
As far as I can tell, many times it's been said that the table was splitted to
save space in join operations where the metadata wasn't really needed.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.