From: Filipe MS B. (UA) <fs...@ua...> - 2013-04-26 21:21:34
|
The only pattern I can spot is that... sorting comes out with an empty value when the raw value starts with "(" ?... Strange (the sequel)... 2013/4/26 Filipe MS Bento (UA) <fs...@ua...> > Strange... here is a sample of mines (after all, and regarding topic, they > are all OPAC related ones): > > Skipped entries for Record ID [000001660] (Lucene docid: 1400399) because > the number of sort keys didn't match the number of stored values. > Fields in dewey-sort: [] > Fields in dewey-raw: [(675)1] > > Skipped entries for Record ID [000001661] (Lucene docid: 1400400) because > the number of sort keys didn't match the number of stored values. > Fields in dewey-sort: [] > Fields in dewey-raw: [(675)1] > > Skipped entries for Record ID [000002938] (Lucene docid: 1401560) because > the number of sort keys didn't match the number of stored values. > Fields in dewey-sort: [] > Fields in dewey-raw: [(031)001] > > Skipped entries for Record ID [000003593] (Lucene docid: 1402119) because > the number of sort keys didn't match the number of stored values. > Fields in dewey-sort: [] > Fields in dewey-raw: [(031)001] > > Skipped entries for Record ID [000249767] (Lucene docid: 1408649) because > the number of sort keys didn't match the number of stored values. > Fields in dewey-sort: [] > Fields in dewey-raw: [(084.5)] > > > > 2013/4/26 Filipe MS Bento (UA) <fs...@ua...> > >> I too do thank you, Mark, for this new *release* of browse-indexing.jar<http://dishevelled.net/browse-indexing.jar>, >> because I also have a couple (of hundreds) records (OPAC and Harvested) >> that give me that same error. >> >> Just running it right now... >> >> All the best / have a nice weekend, >> >> Filipe >> >> >> >> >> 2013/4/26 Mark Triggs <ma...@di...> >> >>> Right. I've updated the version here to print the Record ID too: >>> >>> http://dishevelled.net/browse-indexing.jar >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Mark >>> >>> >>> Mark Triggs <ma...@di...> writes: >>> >>> > Ah, sorry. That docid is Lucene's internal identifier (a sequence >>> > number) and is distinct from VuFind's record ID. While I'm at it, I'll >>> > see if I can change that warning to print the Record ID as well. >>> > >>> > Mark >>> > >>> > >>> > Jay Roos <ja...@gm...> writes: >>> > >>> >> Maybe I'm looking at this wrong somehow? Is the docid reported by >>> >> alphabrowse indexer the same as the record id used by VuFind? If not, >>> what >>> >> is it? Is it just a sequence number? >>> >> >>> >> This is one of the problem records: >>> >> >>> >> Skipped entries for docid 280694 because the number of sort keys >>> didn't >>> >> match the number of stored values. >>> >> Fields in title_sort: [] >>> >> Fields in title_fullStr: [Thunder Road / James Axler.] >>> >> >>> >> However there is no record 280694. The title does exist in VuFind as >>> record >>> >> 647959. So I'm guessing the other number is from somewhere else. >>> >> >>> >> All of that aside, it looks like I have a problem with record going >>> through >>> >> the title_sort routine. >>> >>> -- >>> Mark Triggs >>> <ma...@di...> >>> >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt >>> New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring >>> service >>> that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your >>> browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic >>> and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_apr >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Vufind-tech mailing list >>> Vuf...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vufind-tech >>> >> >> > |