[Feature Request] Consider the ASN not to be a unique field in DB #11835
Replies: 3 comments 2 replies
-
|
You might be interested in #1218. However, dropping the uniqueness constraint on the ASN seems like a very bad way to achieve this. Especially because ASNs are for... Archives, i.e., the physical document shouldn't change. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
The physical document doesn't change in a way that the same ASN is used on the very same document, but as I meantioned, a document may get rescanned because of a "reason" and the question is, what process should trigger that. Possible reasons may be:
I could imagine that users might have very different use cases for ASN in this case. Some want WORM (drop rescans), some may want to replace the existing document, some want to have versions (same ASN many times but grouped,versioned). To me, it would make sense to make it "configurable", maybe even by a workflow option? But having a database unique constraint does not leave much space for options. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
That's why I pointed you at the long standing feature request that asks for versioning of documents. Proper versioning is what you want. A single "Document" with multiple PDF files. It addresses all the scenarios you describe above. Simply making ASNs non-unique is not the way to achieve it. There is a reason it is such a long standing request. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Yes it almost certainly will not be an acceptable solution. Indeed the entire idea of ASN is to be unique, and the assumption that "the chances that you have 2 completely different documents with the same ASN is basically zero" seems very much contrary to what I see in our discussions from users who use ASN. And as noted above, versioning seems a related question, another big topic that will take some time to solve. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
This discussion has been automatically closed due to lack of community support. Please see our contributing guidelines for more details. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Description
Recently we switched to use ASN.
Before ASN when we scanned docs and we made a mistake (forgot the double side, etc) we simply re-scanned the document.
Now with ASN this doesn't work anymore because of the duplicate key.
We were a little suprised even after deleting the document, we were not able to get the new document into the system, however after we deleted it in the trash, everything worked fine.
So, I thought about this behaviour. There might be missing chance for improvment. What would happen if the ASN is not unique in the DB?
I mean, the chances that you have 2 completely different documents with the same ASN is basically zero. The only way you have the same ASN twice is when you scan the same document again. This can be by accident or on purpose.
So if you search for the ASN you would 2 versions of the same documents over time, righ?
Which for me, makes much more sense then "dropping" the second scan completly into the void.
Other
No response
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions