On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 8:43 AM, Marjolein Kremer <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Dan, > > It would look like this: > > Consortium IISG > System 1: IISG > Branch 1: IISG > Sub-Library :a (collection code) > Branch 2: NEHA > > The IISH uses 1300 collection codes. We would like to use the Sub-Library > level for them if that is possible.
There are consequences to using OUs in that way that may be suboptimal, the most important being that you'll get transits to those sub-libs if you check in at "Branch 1", and you'll have to have a workstation registered at each sub-lib to take the items out of transit. I would suggest using shelving locations for collection codes, as they are a closer conceptual match unless you have 1300 physical locations. --miker > > Marjolein > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dan > Scott > Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 9:22 PM > To: Evergreen Discussion Group > Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] sub libraries > > On Mon, 2010-09-06 at 14:24 +0200, Marjolein Kremer wrote: >> Hi, >> >> In the organizational units structure, is there a limit to the number of sub >> libraries that can be made? > > Hi Marjolein: > > To my knowledge, there's no effective limit. There are library > consortiums with around 300 branches (sub libraries) listed in a single > instance, for example. Of course, those are spread through a number of > systems in the organizational hierarchy; for example: > > Consortium > * System 1 > * Branch 1 > * Branch 2 > * System 2 > * Branch 3 > * Branch 4 > * Sub-library a > * Sub-library b > > I'm not sure that anybody has tried creating 300 branches all under a > single system, for example. > > How many were you thinking of creating, and in what sort of structure? > > Dan > > > > > > > > > -- Mike Rylander | VP, Research and Design | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Evergreen Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: [email protected] | web: http://www.esilibrary.com
