Skip to main content
  • Subscribe by RSS
  • Ex Libris Knowledge Center

    p_manage_55: 'Replace Entire Record' instead of 'Replace Fields Within a Record'

    • Article Type: General
    • Product: Aleph
    • Product Version: 15.2

    We ran manage-55 on a subset of records, followed by manage-18 to load the tags. We had done this to two previous subsets successfully. When we did the third, we realized that we set the manage-18 'If Updating Current records' line to 'Replace Entire Record' instead of 'Replace Fields Within a Record'.

    We were able to find the HOL recs by retrieving them via the Items module, so these missing HOLs are there, however, they are no longer linked to the bib records. We found this out when we reran a test manage-55 on a record and it came up with no linked ABC60 records:

    -rw-r--r-- 1 aleph exlibris 1132 Jul 25 16:14 abc01_p_manage_55.00574

    Is there a way to relink our subset of bib records (asf_952a_nnyi) to their respective HOL records so we can run manage-55 on this subset?

    Here are some example bib records in the subset for you to view:

    The items records all seem to still be linked to the HOL records. If we end up having to create new HOL records, what would happen to the links between the HOL and items records?

    You said that in a higher version of Aleph, the option is available to be able to get the corresponding system numbers of any bib record's HOL, item, ADM, etc, correct?

    The util f/3/12 utility can be used in version 16-up. It shows this:

    ENTER DOC-NUMBER : 000342938
    ABC50 000342938

    so, yes, this doc has no ABC60 HOL link.

    This SQL (in abc50) shows what HOL it *should* be linked to:

    SQL-ABC50> select Z30_HOL_DOC_NUMBER_X from z30 where z30_rec_key like '000342938%';


    ABC60 doc record 308089 looks like this:

    Reading doc : 000308089

    CAT L $$c20080725$$lCJH60$$h1428
    852 L $$aNyNyASF$$bASF$$e15 W. 16th Street, NY, NY 10011$$hF593.C283$$iH57 2000

    It lacks the LDR, 008, and LKR fields -- and possibly others.

    Simply re-running p_manage_55 will not correct the problem.

    If you have a backup of the ABC60 z00 from before the p_manage_55 run, the best thing (by far) would be to restore the records which were affected by the p_manage_55 run, and then rerun the p_manage_55 correctly.

    If not, I see that your bib and adm doc numbers are still in synch.

    You could run the following SQL to show each ABC60 HOL doc which has an associated item and what that item (and bib) number is:

    1 select Z30_HOL_DOC_NUMBER_X, substr (z30_rec_key,1,9) from z30 where substr (z30_rec_key,1,9) in (select substr (z30_rec_key,1,9) from z30 minus select substr (z103_rec_key_1,6,9) from abc60.z103 where z103_rec_key_1 like 'ABC01%')

    2 and Z30_HOL_DOC_NUMBER_X ^= '000000000' order by Z30_HOL_DOC_NUMBER_X asc;

    (Note: The SQL is too long to be entered as a single string.)

    It seems, however, that not all HOL records had associated items. (ABC60 doc# 000307945 is an example.)

    • Article last edited: 10/8/2013