Multipart ID numbering autoincrement problem

vvm

Hello,

I need to include into the idno of an Object the idno of the corresponding Collection,

for example Object 10000_001 belongs to Collection 10000.

I have the following code in the multipart_id_numbering.conf:

ca_objects = {

default = {

separator = _,

elements = {

collection_number = {

type = SERIAL,

width = 6,

description = _(Collection number),

editable = 1,

table = ca_collections,

field = idno,

sort_field = idno_sort

},

object_number = {

type = SERIAL,

width = 6,

description = _(Object number),

editable = 1,

table = ca_objects,

field = idno,

sort_field = idno_sort,

zeropad_to_length = 3

}

},

<div>ca_collections = {

default = {

separator = _,

elements = {

collection_number = {

type = SERIAL, 

width = 6, 

description = (Collection number), 

editable = 1,

table = ca_collections,

field = idno,

sort_field = idno_sort

}

The problem is that when I creating a new Object it automatically increments Collection idno, no matter there is no Collection with such idno.

For example I have the latest Collection with idno 10000. On create new Collection I have "<Will be assigned 10001 when saved > ". Its Okay.

But on create new Object I have "<Will be assigned 10001 when saved >_<Will be assigned 001 when saved > " 

if repeat, then "<Will be assigned 10002 when saved ><Will be assigned 002 when saved > " 

repeat again: "<Will be assigned 10003 when saved >_<Will be assigned 002 when saved > " 

I still have the latest Collection with idno 10000.

I think its an error and autoincrement doesn't look into an appropriate table, in this case ca_collections, when creating an Object.

</div>

Julia

You have the object SERIAL looking to the collection idno to determine the incrementing:

collection_number = {

type = SERIAL, 

width = 6, 

description = _(Collection number), 

editable = 1,

table = ca_collections,

field = idno,

sort_field = idno_sort

This will generate object numbers based off of the last used number in the collection table, but won't impact the collection numbering.

Can you describe the ideal numbering workflow you're trying to set up? Is it a question of creating "child" objects that take their collection parent's stem number?

vvm

Hello Julia,

thanks for your answer.

Yes, I want objects to take their collection parent's stem number. Usually the new Object belongs to the last created Collection, so the SERIAL numbering for Objects based on the last idno from the ca_collection table looks nice, except the described behavior. When the Object is created, the collection numbering is not impacted, but the next created object takes increased ca_collections.idno number, as there is one more collection created. It seems to me that it is an erroneous behavior.

As I've described in the first post, while several new Objects are created (one-by-one), the SERIAL number from ca_collections.idno is incremented, no matter that no new Collections were created so far.

Julia

We support parent stemming within a single table, see here: http://docs.collectiveaccess.org/wiki/Cookbook_Chapter_5:_Configuration_Files#Configuring_a_Numbering_System_for_Hierarchical_Records<div> </div><div>We don't inherit across tables (i.e. from collection to object)</div>

vvm

Hello Julia,

In my case I don't necessarily need parent stemming. I just need the new Object always to get the last idno from the ca_collections table as the  SERIAL part of its number. Now the behaviour is erroneous, because the SERIAL is incremented and newly created Objects take idnos that do not exist in ca_collections table. Is it possible to correct this error?

Julia

It's not erroneous in the sense that it's not designed to work the way you are describing. The serial is meant to be configured within the table of the current record, so for example Objects would look to Objects and select one number higher than the last number used. 

vvm

Okay, I understand, thank you.