https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=19893
--- Comment #104 from Alex Arnaud <[email protected]> --- (In reply to David Gustafsson from comment #102) > (In reply to Alex Arnaud from comment #99) > > (In reply to David Gustafsson from comment #96) > > > @Alex Arnaud I agree concaternation of subfields could be useful, but I > > > ague > > > that how this is done has to be defined in the mappings. If we concatenate > > > all the subfields, many existing fields where concatenation is not > > > desirable > > > will be concaternated as a result. > > > > I think the mapping system was designed for that. I.e > > > > author: 700ba > > # we get 700$a and 700$b concatenated > > > > And when concatenation is not wanted: > > > > author: 700b > > author: 700a > > # We get 700$a and 700$b in 2 different array elements > > In that case there are MANY mappings that are defined in the wrong way. Why? This is the behavior we had before. In my opinion, the point here is not to discuss how we should format data for elasticsearch but make indexing process faster. So, the first step is to have at least the same feature/data with koha-specific code we had with Catmendu libraries and, once we are done, check if we already have time saving. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. _______________________________________________ Koha-bugs mailing list [email protected] http://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/
