https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=39558
--- Comment #4 from Nick Clemens (kidclamp) <[email protected]> --- (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? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-bugs website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
