On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 6:16 AM, Bernard Desnoues <bernard.desno...@bulac.fr> wrote: > Hello Lenora, > > We had the same problem. > You could verify your .../biblio/record.abs file and be sure that you index > only > one field, containing the biblionumber in the "local-number" index (the > biblionumber is stored in 001 in our configuration). > Our problem was : > melm 001 local-number,local-number:n > ...... > melm 035$a local-number,local-number:n > We had two fields indexed in "local-number" and we had "ghost entries". > We have corrected in : > melm 001 local-number,local-number:n > ...... > melm 035$a identifier-other,identifier-other:n > Reindex and it was the end of the fabulous story of ghost entries.
Perhaps its just out of my knowledge's scope, by I don't see the problem of having two different fields indexed under the same name, I mean, I'd think both would match the same record and thus not be shown twice. I'd rather think of a weird coincidence. I'm sorry if my confusion just makes the situation more obscure. To+ _______________________________________________ Koha mailing list http://koha-community.org Koha@lists.katipo.co.nz http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha
