Hello, All. I would greatly appreciate any advice on how to best
merge a v92.1 installation into a v99.1. Here are some details on our
setups, and please let me know if any additional information would be
helpful.
The v92.1 installation is named "CLASSE Restricted
EDMS" (redms.classe.cornell.edu) and has two collections (CPDRAFT and
CBX) we would like to retain. The following two records are
representative of the records in these collections. Note that some of
the fulltext files are stored internally to Invenio, and some are
still on our old server (external to Invenio).
------
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim";>
<record>
<controlfield tag="001">1898</controlfield>
<datafield tag="037" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">CBX2008-018</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">eng</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">Heltsley, B.</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">Observation of J/psi --> 3 gamma</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="700" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">Mahlke, H.</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="856" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
<subfield code="f">[email protected]</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2=" ">
<subfield code="u">https://redms.classe.cornell.edu/record/1898/files/
</subfield>
<subfield code="z">Access to Fulltext</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="909" ind1="c" ind2="0">
<subfield code="e">CLEO</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">CBX</subfield>
</datafield>
</record>
<record>
<controlfield tag="001">1870</controlfield>
<controlfield tag="003">NIC-LEPP</controlfield>
<datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">The M1 Transittions $\psi(1S,2S)\to \gamma
\eta_c (1S)$ in CLEO</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="100" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">R. Mitchell, M. Shepherd</subfield>
<subfield code="e">author</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="490" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">CBX</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="909" ind1="C" ind2="0">
<subfield code="e">CLEO</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="710" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">Laboratory of Nuclear Studies, Cornell
University</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">CBX</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2=" ">
<subfield code="u">http://www.lns.cornell.edu/restricted/CBX/2008/CBX08-6/cbx.pdf
</subfield>
<subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield>
<subfield code="y">PDF Full Text</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="037" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">CBX08-6</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">Using 24.45~million $\psi(2S)$ decays, we
measure $B(\psi(2S)\rightarrow\gamma\eta_c$, the ratio of $B(\psi(2S)
\rightarrow\gamma\eta_c$ to $B(J/\psi\rightarrow\gamma\eta_c$, and
$B(J/\psi\rightarrow\gamm
a\eta_c$ using a combination of inclusive and exclusive decay modes of
the $\eta_c$. We find that a non-trivial line shape in the energy
spectrum of the M1 transition photon prevents a precision measurement
of the $\eta_c$ ma
ss and width and complicates the extraction of the above branching
fractions.</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">eng</subfield>
</datafield>
</record>
</collection>
------
The v99.1 installation is named "CLASSE
EDMS" (edms.classe.cornell.edu) and contains one PICTURE collection we
would like to retain. For example, one of the records is as follows:
------
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim";>
<record>
<controlfield tag="001">91</controlfield>
<datafield tag="037" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">PICTURE-CLASSE-2008-002</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="245" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">Dust Particles</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">Shows dust particles.</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="653" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">dust particle</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="856" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
<subfield code="f">[email protected]</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
<subfield code="a">PICTURE</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="909" ind1="c" ind2="0">
<subfield code="e">CLASSE</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2=" ">
<subfield code="u">https://edms.classe.cornell.edu/record/91/files/PICTURE-CLASSE-2008-002.JPG
</subfield>
<subfield code="z">Access to files</subfield>
</datafield>
<datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2=" ">
<subfield code="q">https://edms.classe.cornell.edu/record/91/files/icon-PICTURE-CLASSE-2008-002.gif
</subfield>
<subfield code="x">icon</subfield>
</datafield>
</record>
</collection>
------
Besides the differences mentioned above, the collections, indexes, and
logical fields are configured identically on both. We would like to
end up with one v99.1 installation (named "CLASSE EDMS") that contains
all three of these collections. Ideally, we would like all of the
fulltext files to be stored internally on the Invenio server.
We are not particularly concerned with retaining the record ID's from
the v92.1 installation, but it would be convenient if we easily could
(I could imagine dropping the PICTURE collection, uploading the CBX
and CPDRAFT collections retaining their record id's, and then
reloading the PICTURE collection generating new record id's).
I would be extremely grateful for any advice on how to best proceed
and what pitfalls we may encounter. Of course, please let me know if
there is any additional information I can provide.
Many thanks,
Devin
