2024-04-29 Resource Access Meeting Notes - Remote Storage and open discussion round
- Jana Freytag
- Mark Canney
Date
Apr 29, 2024
Recordings
Find all recordings here: https://recordings.openlibraryfoundation.org/folio/resource-access-sig/ (pw: folio-lsp)
Zoom
https://zoom.us/j/337279319 (pw: folio-lsp)
Attendees
@julie.bickle
@Magnus Andersson
@Thomas Trutt
@Lola Estelle
@Laurence Mini
@David Bottorff
@Mark Canney
@Tara Barnett
@Christine Tobias
@Kimie Kester
@Dale Arntson
@Dwayne Swigert
@Katie Motush
@Amelia Sutton
@Jana Freytag
Discussion Items:
Time | Item | Who | Description | Goals/Info/notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
5Min | Administrivia | @Cornelia Awenius @Jana Freytag | Note taker: @Mark Canney | |
30Min | Remote Storage | @Thomas Trutt | ||
25Min | open discussion round | all | Bring errors and questions to the group |
|
Meeting Notes
Thomas led the group on a discussion of several issues relating to remote storage integration which he is investigating. The first issue we discussed is already in JIRA and the others are preliminary:
MODRS-121, "Remote storage allows null barcodes", https://folio-org.atlassian.net/browse/MODRS-121. The problem is mod-remote-storage accepts items with null barcodes but ASR uses the barcode as the primary key and the entry is required. With some integrations (Dematic?) the edge module leaves the item in the queue and continues to query the FOLIO system and this results in hung processes.
One solution is to prohibit the selection of an ASR location for an item with no barcode; but if the accession is occurring at the Holdings level it can be hard to identify the item that needs to be fixed (potentially hundreds of items). A second solution would be for the system to generate an automatic barcode and present a warning message. What do others think?
Some feel the process should warn you but still allow you to complete the action. On the other hand, this could introduce problems because the item would have an associated barcode that does not reflect the barcode that is actually on the book. After discussion the consensus is we need the MM-SIG to provide their perspective on the issue.
Thomas briefly raised a second issue relating to remote storage, the use of TCP/IP versus API for remote storage integration. Currently there are multiple (3?) connection types in the settings: TCP/IP, API, Staging Director. There is a desire to consolidate around one solution, probably TCP/IP. Thomas will write up a story if anyone wishes to provide input later.
The next RA-SIG meeting will probably be Monday, May 13th unless someone has a topic they wish to discuss prior to that date.