Epic to link all support issues located in Dev projects (SUP-12)

[UIU-2093] Large amount of renewals failing when overrides are needed Created: 04/Mar/21  Updated: 29/Apr/21  Resolved: 29/Apr/21

Status: Closed
Project: ui-users
Components: None
Affects versions: None
Fix versions: None
Parent: Epic to link all support issues located in Dev projects

Type: Bug Priority: P2
Reporter: Anya Assignee: Matt Connolly
Resolution: Done Votes: 0
Labels: support
Remaining Estimate: Not Specified
Time Spent: Not Specified
Original estimate: Not Specified

Attachments: PNG File image-2021-04-28-11-14-10-972.png    
Sprint: Prokopovych - Sprint 111, Prokopovych - Sprint 112, Prokopovych - Sprint 113
Development Team: Prokopovych
Release: R1 2021 Bug Fix
Affected Institution:
Chalmers, University of Chicago
Epic Link: Epic to link all support issues located in Dev projects

 Description   

There is a patron (binary) that has  400+ items that we needed to renew. 

We have made a couple of attempts to renew.

First checking the box to renew all loans and then to override the ones that had to be overridden for different reasons. There was a 500 error.

Then we marked 5-20 loans at the time and renewed them (overriding etc). That seemed to mostly work but was a very cumbersome process. We received the error (500) a couple of times as well. 

Then we again tried to renew all. Waited patiently for at least 20 minutes.
Got the override dialogue. Filled it in. Then got the error. 

In the end, we decided to renew, only the ones that were due this month. We had to do that 5 requests at a time. 

We do not know if the issue is due to the number of loans or the overrides that needed to take place .

Interested parties: Marie Widigson



 Comments   
Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 04/Mar/21 ]

Anya:  I am watching this issue so I will know when you have assigned it to my dev team.  Thanks...

 

Comment by Anya [ 08/Mar/21 ]

Support sig : mod circ - might not be able to handle this, which might overload the system. 

Comment by Kelly Drake [ 08/Mar/21 ]

David Bottorff reports regarding Chicago:

We have several faculty and graduate students with 200 or more loans, and they will have to renew those items 4 times a year (for grad students) or 1 time a year (for faculty).
 
We also have cases with both where they have let their items age to lost and staff have to renew those items via an override. This also needs to be able to handle 200 or more renewals at a time--there is a greater load involved because the renewal also needs to waive the lost item fee and lost item processing fee for those items.
 
106 patrons currently have 200 or more loans (excluding departmental accounts)
 
And that's a low number due to COVID

Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 11/Mar/21 ]

Cheryl Malmborg : Please review this bug to confirm that it needs to be fixed.  When you are done, please let me know so we can groom it for a dev to start.  Thanks!

Comment by Cheryl Malmborg [ 12/Mar/21 ]

Holly MistlebauerThis is definitely a bug that needs to be fixed.  Given that Chalmers had some problems renewing even 5-20 items at a time it is likely to affect many academic institutions.

Comment by David Bottorff [ 12/Mar/21 ]

Does this bug also impact patron-initiated renewals via the API?

Comment by Anya [ 15/Mar/21 ]

Support: Cheryl Malmborg will you be able to get to this with in the next few days...

Comment by Cheryl Malmborg [ 15/Mar/21 ]

Anya I did respond to Holly that this needs to be worked on by developers as a bug.

Comment by Anya [ 22/Mar/21 ]

Support: could this be worked on in the current or next sprint... 

Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 26/Mar/21 ]

Anya: Please remind me of the process.  I thought that the SUP- issue would be moved to the appropriate project (in this case UIU-) so we can schedule the work.  Is that not true?  Should Cheryl have done this step?  I just want to understand the process.  Thanks, Holly

P.S.  I will move it now so it gets into the next sprint.

Comment by Holly Mistlebauer [ 29/Mar/21 ]

Matt Connolly:  Using the Iris code, please try renewing 400+ items that don't have blocks and then 400+ that do.  If both approaches work fine, we will close this ticket as fixed by Iris.  If the override ends up being the issue, we will pass this on to Vega.   Thanks!

Comment by Anya [ 05/Apr/21 ]

Support: Matt Connolly were you able to test this? Thanks 

Comment by Matt Connolly [ 07/Apr/21 ]

Anya Yes, this appears to be working in Iris. I've tested it in both snapshot and bugfest. While it's certainly not a fast process, it does succeed with 400 renewals for a blocked patron after a few minutes. It also, in bugfest, comes with the mildly horrifying side effect of sending the patron (me, in this case) 400 individual emails to report that the items were renewed – but that's a different problem. If you'd like to try it with the items I set up, the user account is https://bugfest-iris.folio.ebsco.com/users/caaef265-e110-4cb5-85e4-09ee9249b0a9. If I receive another batch of 400 emails, I'll know it's working for you, too!

 

 

Comment by Kelly Drake [ 26/Apr/21 ]

Holly Mistlebauer = Are you aware of this issue/fix?  ie can we close this?

Comment by Kelly Drake [ 28/Apr/21 ]

Matt Connolly - emails should be starting to overload your inbox.  

Comment by Kelly Drake [ 28/Apr/21 ]

Tested Results - I did not get an error (500) are reported in the initial bug description.  So that is good.

But, there does seem to be some confusion on whether the override worked.  The due dates did change, but  the screen indicated that the items were not renewed.  But that is not a p2 bug.

Comment by Kelly Drake [ 28/Apr/21 ]

Anya, Holly Mistlebauer, Cheryl Malmborg

We are no longer getting the error message, and the items are renewing.  However, there is a bit of confusion about the interplay of blocks.  The patrons blocks appear be successfully overridden, but then we get this error message (above) that indicates that the item is not renewed because of the loan has reached the maximum number of renewals. 

Which makes me think - we should close this and create a new bug report?  

Comment by David Bottorff [ 28/Apr/21 ]

Has this been tested against items that have aged to lost and have lost item fees associated with them that need to be waived/cancelled as part of the renewal process? If this introduces inconsistencies or problems with the fee fine data that would be another big problem

 

Comment by Cheryl Malmborg [ 28/Apr/21 ]

Kelly Drake I think it is ok that there is a separate override for the items that have reached max number of renewals.

I am confused by the screenshot. Was it really 401 items that were not renewed because they had reached the max number of renewals?

Comment by Matt Connolly [ 28/Apr/21 ]

The "item not renewed" errors (which I did not see in my testing) is the result of the way the sample items were created. I somehow managed to end up with a circulation policy that only allowed one renewal, which I used up myself when debugging. If you want, I can create a new batch so someone can test again.

Comment by David Bottorff [ 28/Apr/21 ]

I agree with Cheryl that it's fine (and probably preferable) for their to be two overrides required in that scenario. First override is the result of the patron block, second override would be because of the renewal policy. Both need to be possible and need to work at scale. And again, all of this also needs to reliably update fees/fines and notices

 

Comment by Kelly Drake [ 29/Apr/21 ]

I am closing this as the remaining issues with blocking and fee policies are not the issue described by this jira.  Additional jira(s) should be created if those are issues. 

Generated at Thu Feb 08 22:21:32 UTC 2024 using Jira 1001.0.0-SNAPSHOT#100246-sha1:7a5c50119eb0633d306e14180817ddef5e80c75d.