Add vufind_sort option to [Loans] in Folio.ini by meganschanz · Pull Request #5109 · vufind-org/vufind

meganschanz · 2026-03-03T19:39:45Z

This includes two updates to checked out items for FOLIO users:

New Feature: Adding in vufind_sort[] option to [Loans] section of the Folio.ini to enable adding VuFind side only sort options for checked out items. For example, sorting by a field that is not sortable in the FOLIO API (like title).
Bug Fix: Updating the default sort[] options within the [Loans] section of the Folio.ini to ensure consistent sort order in the event that a patron has more transactions with the same dueDate value than the pageSize configured. FOLIO does not ensure the order of the items returned between pages in consistent in this case and can cause the same item to appear on multiple pages (and even items to be missing).

…ort options in [Loans] in Folio.ini

meganschanz · 2026-03-03T19:41:38Z

I honestly had more trouble coming up with the clearest explanation for this feature to add in the Folio.ini than it took to make the code change. I'm open to updating the wording if there are suggestions to make it more clear.

demiankatz

Thanks, @meganschanz!

One obvious problem: how do you reconcile VuFind-level sorting with pagination when there is a large set of values? Each page will be sorted independently, but the overall result set may not make sense. Do we need to add a note about that? Disable some sort options when the result set is too big?

demiankatz

Thanks, @meganschanz -- see below for one comment related to the latest round of changes.

Beyond that, what are your thoughts on the pagination issue I mentioned earlier?

meganschanz · 2026-03-05T14:09:15Z

One obvious problem: how do you reconcile VuFind-level sorting with pagination when there is a large set of values? Each page will be sorted independently, but the overall result set may not make sense. Do we need to add a note about that? Disable some sort options when the result set is too big?

Well that feels obvious in retrospect, particularly considering the pagination was how I noticed the first sorting issue, but I didn't think through the pagination issue this would cause initially! After spending the afternoon thinking about, talking with the team and FOLIO developer there is no ideal solution for our specific end goal of enabling title sort on checked out items.

When chatting with our FOLIO developer, there isn't a way to sort by title via the API and there likely wouldn't be support for adding it (due to the general policy of not wanting to do joins cross modules -- mod-circulation and mod-inventory). The FOLIO interface is able to do the sorting client-side because they have no pagination (they set the limit on the API call to an arbitrarily high number).

For VuFind the only solutions I can see all have issues:

The one you suggested, only making the vufind_sort options available when there is no pagination (similar to how the renew_all option isn't on the page if there is pagination). But this would also mean we wouldn't want it to be allowed as the default_sort either. I don't particularly like the idea of sort options disappearing for users based on the number of options they have checked out, although there were mixed feelings on our team on the idea.
If there is a vufind_sort option passed, we page through all of the loans, sort them, then return the requested chunk. I don't like this either because then every single page of results requests all of the results. Which is already happening in the AJAX call to get the badge information for the account-menu.

I think I'll ask this in the Slack to see if others in the community have ideas. Otherwise it might be preferable to just merge only the bug fix portion of this ticket to update the sort values to have a more consistent sort order.

demiankatz · 2026-03-05T19:24:09Z

Thanks for the detailed analysis, @meganschanz. I agree that it might be beneficial to separate out the bug fix portion (maybe even as a PR against release-11.0, to get the fix in place faster) while we think through the full implications of this.

It's possible that doing the "paginate through the results and then slice the appropriate page from the accumulated results" approach, combined with a large page size, would yield good results for the vast majority of cases. I think it's just a matter of watching out for situations where the page size gets so large that the Solr lookup associated with the request becomes too memory-expensive.

In any case, tapping into the wisdom of Slack sounds like a good next step. Let me know if there's more I can do to help in the meantime!

demiankatz

@meganschanz, now that #5121 is merged, there are some conflicts to resolve here... Of course, no rush if we're not even sure if we want to move forward with this yet. Just commenting to track the current state of things. :-)

… sort

meganschanz · 2026-04-22T15:31:57Z

I decided to look at this again. I got it to a working state, we just need to decide if we're comfortable with the potential performance implications of this feature. I did add a note about it in the config.

This of course is not at all urgent, but maybe something we could get opinions on at an upcoming community call since Slack didn't get any feedback.

I feel like it is a pretty common feature to be able to want to sort your checked out items by title and FOLIO's API is not going to add the ability to do it natively due to where the data is located cross-modules, so if we want to offer it it, this is likely the best approach.

demiankatz · 2026-04-22T16:03:06Z

Thanks, @meganschanz -- I'll try to review this again when I'm a little more caught up. In the meantime, I've added this to the next Community Call agenda so I don't forget to bring it up there. My bottom line is that as long as the option is off by default and its trade-offs clearly documented, I don't think it's harmful to provide it if we think it will remain useful to some users on an ongoing basis.

demiankatz

Thanks, @meganschanz, see below for a couple of thoughts from a very quick review!

demiankatz · 2026-04-24T12:53:38Z

 ; the same for non-unique values.
-;sort[dueDate/sort.ascending itemId/sort.ascending] = sort_due_date_asc
-;sort[dueDate/sort.descending itemId/sort.ascending] = sort_due_date_desc
+sort[dueDate/sort.ascending itemId/sort.ascending] = sort_due_date_asc


Was it a conscious choice to uncomment the previously commented-out defaults?

Good catch. That was unintentional. I just pushed a commit to undo that change.

demiankatz · 2026-04-24T12:53:44Z

+
 ; Default sort (note: this must be defined in the sort[] options above to be applied!)
-;default_sort="dueDate/sort.ascending itemId/sort.ascending"
+default_sort="dueDate/sort.ascending itemId/sort.ascending"


Same question here.

Same as above.

demiankatz · 2026-04-24T12:55:42Z

+     *
+     * @return array
+     */
+    protected function sortArray(array $data, string $sortField): array


Do we do this anywhere else? If so, I wonder if a trait would make sense. But I didn't check, so maybe that's a premature suggestion. :-)

There isn't anywhere else in the code that currently does a strnatcasecmp. We have other sorting functions, but not ones that are sorting associative arrays based on a specific column (at least that I could find in my searching). I lean towards not making a trait until we have another use for it, but I could be convinced otherwise.

I agree, no sense in overengineering this prematurely. I just thought there might be another similar function somewhere else. Thanks for confirming that there is not! :-)

demiankatz

@meganschanz, I had time for another closer look at the code, and the only thing I found this time was a typo in a comment.

I'd be happy to approve and merge this once that is fixed, but I can also leave it open until after the Community Call if you want to allow more time for feedback before closing things out. Let me know how you would like to proceed!

demiankatz · 2026-04-24T18:30:29Z

            $count = $this->getResultCount('/circulation/loans', compact('query'));
        }
+
+        // Apply local sorted if requested


Suggested change

// Apply local sorted if requested

// Apply local sorting if requested

Add vufind_sort option to [Loans] in Folio.ini; bugfix with default s…

8a8ae3f

…ort options in [Loans] in Folio.ini

demiankatz requested changes Mar 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread module/VuFind/src/VuFind/ILS/Driver/Folio.php

Comment thread config/vufind/Folio.ini Outdated

Typo fix and make sortHoldings a wrapper for sortArray

6092db7

demiankatz requested changes Mar 4, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread module/VuFind/src/VuFind/ILS/Driver/Folio.php Outdated

Change sortArray back to sortHoldings for backwards compatibility

0d1b0ae

meganschanz mentioned this pull request Mar 6, 2026

Update sort settings on Folio.ini for checkout items page #5121

Closed

meganschanz marked this pull request as draft March 6, 2026 14:30

demiankatz requested changes Mar 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

meganschanz added 3 commits April 22, 2026 09:52

Merge remote-tracking branch 'core/dev' into checked-out-sort

a7db085

Pull all items and then slice results for page to have accurate local…

3c4749b

… sort

Unit test fix for no sort option passed

b45c4d2

meganschanz marked this pull request as ready for review April 22, 2026 15:32

demiankatz requested changes Apr 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

Restore commented out defaults

70ebcc1

demiankatz requested changes Apr 24, 2026

View reviewed changes

	// Apply local sorted if requested
	// Apply local sorting if requested

Conversation

meganschanz commented Mar 3, 2026

Uh oh!

meganschanz commented Mar 3, 2026

Uh oh!

demiankatz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

demiankatz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

meganschanz commented Mar 5, 2026

Uh oh!

demiankatz commented Mar 5, 2026

Uh oh!

demiankatz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

meganschanz commented Apr 22, 2026

Uh oh!

demiankatz commented Apr 22, 2026

Uh oh!

demiankatz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

demiankatz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants