Can you try adding

 

max_items => 0,

 

to your view definition

e.g.

 

                {

                                id => “creators”,

                                max_items => 0,

                                allow_null => 0,

                                hideempty => 1,

                                ….

                }

 

Then rebuilding the view ?

 

 

That’s the problem – I get nothing except:

 

The number of items (2001) for this view has exceeded system limits (2000). The system administrator either needs to increase "max_items" or apply additional filters to this view.

 

I’m about 90% sure that this is the Null items in the author table, where we have no internal id for non Lincoln authors and it just goes into the database as a Null, but the code suggests that should be suppressed?

 

 

Can you get to the admin edit view for any of the items you can see?

Do any of the creator (etc) entries look like they might have missing information?

 

 

It tells me that there is a cap of 2000 items per view.

 

 

And if you look at http://<your.domain.name>/views/creators/NULL.html do you see the 9001 items, and what are their various contributor_internal_id fields, names, etc?

 

 

It must have crept in there somewhere (a lot of this is coming from me cleansing my data from a number of duct tape fixes that have been put in) but that’s a whole other kettle of fish!

 

Your suggestion of looking at the source was helpful – it’s trying to link to NULL.html which suggests it’s generated a page for those nulls and is ignoring the rules in the view definition.

 

Argh!

 

 

Presumably that ORCID / ISNI is in the internal ID field or is it out of the translation?  How many things are in your repository?

 

 

I’m getting ID’s and translated names, but then I’m also getting this ? entry. Screenshot: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B67FaE28LeB-bkYxQkZzM0tfU2M/view?usp=sharing

 

 

 

Is your view just displaying the ids or is it translating to a name e.g. from the user table?  Might it be not finding the id during the translation?

 

 

Yup. The exact definition is:

 

push @{ $c->{browse_views} }, (

{

  id => "creators",

  allow_null => 0,

  hideempty => 1,

  menus => [

    {

      fields => [ "creators_internalid", "contributors_internalid", "editors_internalid"  ],

      new_column_at => [1, 1],

      mode => "sections",

      open_first_section => 1,

      group_range_function => "EPrints::Update::Views::cluster_ranges_30",

      grouping_function => "EPrints::Update::Views::group_by_a_to_z",

    },

  ],

  order => "-date/title",

  variations => [

    "type",

    "date;truncate=4,reverse",

    "DEFAULT",

  ],

});

 

 

Hi Andrew,

Does your view definition in cfg.d have these parameters?

                allow_null => 0,

                hideempty => 1,

 

Alan

 

 

Hello all!

 

So, I’ve implemented an “Internal ID” for the creator browse on our new repository as per David Newman’s guide here: http://wiki.eprints.org/w/Using_Internal_IDs_for_Staff_Browse_Views

 

This works fantastically and both clears up and exposes some issues with our data which is perfect – a large part of this was to ensure we can clean our data up appropriately. One thing it has done, however, is added a ? entry to the creator browse – I’m assuming that this is picking up external authors on records who do not have internal ID’s set against them and do not have a user record. There are around 9001 of these although I cannot see them as the browse is not creating a page to show them, merely showing the number in the listing. Is there an easy way to suppress this as it’s more of a visual issue?

 

Many thanks!

Andrew

-- The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter (RC 000391), an exempt charity in England & Wales and a charity registered in Scotland (SC 038302). The Open University is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority in relation to its secondary activity of credit broking.