Title: Message Title
|
|
|
|
I may be mistaken, but it sounds like using "max(doi_id)" could cause some major issues when restoring content via AIPs:
https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/DSDOC4x/AIP+Backup+and+Restore
Specifically, it sounds like you are assuming that "doi_id" = "doi_seq". Although generally in DSpace, that may be true, it is almost NEVER true when content has been restored from a backup (especially from an AIP). This is one of the primary reasons why "handle_seq" needs special treatment in "update_sequences.sql" and does not make the assumption that "handle_id" = "handle_seq"
https://github.com/DSpace/DSpace/blob/master/dspace/etc/postgres/update-sequences.sql#L90
When content is restored from AIPs, it often *cannot* reuse those table IDs "handle_id" or "doi_id"...so the sequence and id get out-of-sync. AIPs explicitly do not preserve table IDs as they are controlled automatically by the database (and when an AIP is restored, the order of initial object creation is not maintained....so an object which had a handle_id=10 could be restored to handle_id=2011).
So, I'm worried about the assumption this makes. I'm not sure of any way around that assumption, yet, but it sounds like it will complicate the ability to use AIPs for backup purposes (as the DOI generation may encounter conflicts after you restore content from AIPs)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your
Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics Pro!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Dspace-devel mailing list
Dspace-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dspace-devel
