LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  February 2013

CODE4LIB February 2013

Subject:

Re: Anyone have a SUSHI client?

From:

Tom Keays <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 4 Feb 2013 10:38:37 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (134 lines)

Hi Joshua,

I was mainly looking at your program, not for the code, but as a way to
bring myself up to speed about current practices in modeling the COUNTER
data. I'm trying to avoid reinventing something that has already been well
thought through. I apologize for calling out your model. You have gotten
much further than I have. Some of the other respondents in this thread have
set me straight on some things I was very fuzzy on going in.

How go about I collecting and storing the data is still something I haven't
resolved yet. I personally would prefer a Python solution, but there forces
here at MPOW that suggest I should build a data repository in SharePoint.
Assuming that is the case, Serial Solution's open source SUSHI harvester
written in .NET might actually be the way for me to go. So, my next step is
to look at their data model and see what reports they collect and store.

As an aside, I'm also now wondering if de-duping is strictly necessary as
long as there is a field to record the date the report was generated.
 De-duping (or maybe just deprecating duplicate data) could be separate
from the collection process.

Best,
Tom

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 10:07 AM, Joshua Welker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Tom,
>
> I am the guy who wrote sushi.py around this time last year. My apologies
> for the shabbiness of the code. It was meant to be primarily a proof of
> concept. It's definitely incomplete. I only completed the DB3 and JR1
> report logic up to this point, but it would be easy enough to add other
> report types. You're also right that sushi.py doesn't do anything to dedupe
> data, but it would be very simple to write a script that reads through the
> SQL records and deletes dupes. You could also use the built-in UNIQUE flag
> in MySQL when creating your table so that duplicate records just don't get
> saved. If you use the CSV export functionality of sushi.py, Excel has some
> built-in dedupe features that would help as well.
>
> Let me know if you'd like some help modifying sushi.py. I sort of gave up
> on it last spring. SUSHI implementation among vendors is still pretty
> shabby, and there are still some weaknesses in the SUSHI standard (I wrote
> about them in the Nov 2012 issue of Computers in Libraries). The
> productivity gains I was seeing from using SUSHI ended up being pretty low.
>
> Josh Welker
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Tom Keays
> Sent: Friday, January 25, 2013 8:40 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Anyone have a SUSHI client?
>
> I've been looking briefly at sushi.py, as a way to orient myself to
> collecting stats this way. I'm not intending to single out sushi.py, but
> looking at it (mainly the data structure at this point, and not the code
> itself), raises some questions about the best approach for collecting SUSHI
> data.
>
> sushi.py seems to have a small number of routines; mainly to retrieve the
> XML file from a vendor and ingest the data in that file into a MySQL
> database. There are only MySQL tables for COUNTER JR1, DR1, DR2, and DR2
> reports and they mirror, to a degree, the structure of the item records
> returned in the SUSHI xml. Here are the skeletons of 2 of the sushi.py SQL
> tables:
>
> counter_jr1
>   id int,
>   print_issn varchar,
>   online_issn varchar,
>   platform varchar,
>   item_name text,
>   data_type varchar,
>   date_begin datetime,
>   date_end datetime,
>   ft_pdf int,
>   ft_html int,
>   ft_total varchar
>
> counter_db3
>   id int,
>   platform varchar,
>   item_name text,
>   data_type varchar,
>   date_begin datetime,
>   date_end datetime,
>   searches int,
>   sessions int
>
> On the face of it, this seems like a pretty good data structure (although
> I have a couple of concerns, that I will get to) but my main question is
> whether there is any agreement about how to collect this data? If I were to
> dig into some of the other SUSHI packages mentioned in this thread, what
> would I find there? Excel-formatted COUNTER reports are simply a table of
> columns, representing various fields, such as title (for JR1), platform,
> publisher (for JR1), ISSN (for JR1), etc., followed by columns for up to 12
> months of the collected year, and then summary data.  JR1 reports have
> fulltext HTML, PDF, and Total columns. DR1 has two rows, one for searches
> and one for sesssions, with YTD totals in the final column. Similar data
> structures exist for other COUNTER reports. They rely on the user to
> interpret them and probably ought not to inform a decision for structuring
> the data in a database. Is there been any best practice for how COUNTER
> data is modeled in a database?
>
> There are other COUNTER reports besides those four. For instance, some
> journal vendors do indeed report searches and sessions using the DR3
> report, but others use the equivalent JR4 report, so I would have expected
> sushi.py to have a mechanism to collect these. Does SUSHI only deliver JR1,
> DR1, DR2, and DR2 reports, or is this a problem with sushi.py?
>
> Now, one of the selling points for SUSHI is that if a vendor ever advises
> that you should re-collect data for a given time period, the xml you
> receive is structured such that the act of collecting OUGHT TO update,
> rather than duplicate, data previously collected. However in sushi.py's SQL
> structure, which gives every row a unique (auto-incremented) ID number,
> there would have to be logic applied during the ingest to prevent multiple
> instances of data collected from the same vendor for the same time period.
> So, that's a concern.
>
> I'm also concerned about what is represented in the ft_pdf, ft_html, and
> ft_total fields. In the Excel COUNTER reports, the ft_pdf, ft_html, and
> ft_total columns simply tabulate the YTD totals and the only way you would
> be able to derive a monthly breakdown would be to collect 12 monthly
> reports and analyze the differences from month to month -- something that
> most libraries don't do. I have to go back and confirm this, but I don't
> think the SUSHI reports are giving a month-only breakdown for those fields,
> so I wonder about their inclusion in that table. I guess my question is
> what is returned in the SUSHI xml report: monthly or yearly figures for the
> ft_pdf, ft_html, and ft_total fields?
>
> Tom
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager