we have to write a code to Fetch all "Customer - Direct" type accounts and get all its open cases and Change the owners for all these open cases.
You don't need code for this, there's perfectly fine setup -> transfer utility to find & change owners. Or run a report, change it in excel, use import wizard back?
List<Case> cases = [SELECT Id, Account.OwnerId
FROM Case
WHERE IsClosed = false AND Account.Type = 'Customer - Direct'];
for(Case c : cases){
c.OwnerId = c.Account.OwnerId; // I don't know what you want to do,
// you can hardcode specific user's '005...' id here too
}
update cases;
Related
I am attempting to use Apex to create a multi-contact event.
I have already enabled Allow Users to Relate Multiple Contacts to Tasks and Events in the activity settings in the scratch org.
I am following the guide and the example at the bottom of these docs but I am constantly getting an error when pushing to the scratch org:
// ...
event.setEventWhoIds(attendeeContactIds);
// ...
Method does not exist or incorrect signature: void setEventWhoIds(List<String>) from the type Event.
I also tried to write directly to the field with:
event.EventWhoIds = attendeeContactIds;
With that, I get the error, that the field is not writable.
attendeeContactIds is a List of Strings representing Contact IDs.
What could I be missing? 🤔🙇🏻♂️
It's bit stupid, it's readonly in apex. It's exposed so integrations can quickly create event and essentially a related list together in one all-or-nothing transaction. See also https://salesforce.stackexchange.com/questions/238094/eventwhoids-is-not-writeable-in-apex-class-but-working-on-jsforce
Try something like that?
Savepoint sp = Database.setSavepoint();
event e = new Event(
StartDateTime = System.now(),
EndDateTime = System.now().addHours(1)
);
insert e;
List<EventRelation> invitations = new List<EventRelation>();
for(Contact c : [SELECT Id FROM Contact LIMIT 5]){
invitations.add(new EventRelation(
EventId = e.Id,
RelationId = c.Id,
IsInvitee = true
));
}
insert invitations;
Database.rollback(sp); // unless you really want to send it out
I am new to ndb and gae and have a problem coming up with a good solution setting indexes.
Let say we have a user model like this:
class User(ndb.Model):
name = ndb.StringProperty()
email = ndb.StringProperty(required = True)
fb_id = ndb.StringProperty()
Upon login if I was going to check against the email address with a query, I believe this would be quite slow and inefficient. Possibly it has to do a full table scan.
q = User.query(User.email == EMAIL)
user = q.fetch(1)
I believe it would be much faster, if User models were saved with the email as their key.
user = user(id=EMAIL)
user.put()
That way I could retrieve them like this a lot faster (so I believe)
key = ndb.Key('User', EMAIL)
user = key.get()
So far if I am wrong please correct me. But after implementing this I realized there is a chance that facebook users would change their email address, that way upon a new oauth2.0 connection their new email can't be recognized in the system and they will be created as a new user. Hence maybe I should use a different approach:
Using the social-media-provider-id (unique for all provider users)
and
provider-name (in rare case that two twitter and facebook users share
the same provider-id)
However in order to achieve this, I needed to set two indexes, which I believe is not possible.
So what could I do? Shall I concatenate both fields as a single key and index on that?
e.g. the new idea would be:
class User(ndb.Model):
name = ndb.StringProperty()
email = ndb.StringProperty(required = True)
provider_id = ndb.StringProperty()
provider_type = ndb.StringProperty()
saving:
provider_id = 1234
provider_type = fb
user = user(id=provider_id + provider_type)
user.put()
retrieval:
provider_id = 1234
provider_type = fb
key = ndb.Key('User', provider_id + provider_type)
user = key.get()
This way we don't care any more if the user changes the email address on his social media.
Is this idea sound?
Thanks,
UPDATE
Tim's solution sounded so far the cleanest and likely also the fastest to me. But I came across a problem.
class AuthProvider(polymodel.PolyModel):
user_key = ndb.KeyProperty(kind=User)
active = ndb.BooleanProperty(default=True)
date_created = ndb.DateTimeProperty(auto_now_add=True)
#property
def user(self):
return self.user_key.get()
class FacebookLogin(AuthProvider):
pass
View.py: Within facebook_callback method
provider = ndb.Key('FacebookLogin', fb_id).get()
# Problem is right here. provider is always None. Only if I used the PolyModel like this:
# ndb.Key('AuthProvider', fb_id).get()
#But this defeats the whole purpose of having different sub classes as different providers.
#Maybe I am using the key handeling wrong?
if provider:
user = provider.user
else:
provider = FacebookLogin(id=fb_id)
if not user:
user = User()
user_key = user.put()
provider.user_key = user_key
provider.put()
return user
One slight variation on your approach which could allow a more flexible model will be to create a separate entity for the provider_id, provider_type, as the key or any other auth scheme you come up with
This entity then holds a reference (key) of the actual user details.
You can then
do a direct get() for the auth details, then get() the actual user details.
The auth details can be changed without actually rewriting/rekeying the user details
You can support multiple auth schemes for a single user.
I use this approach for an application that has > 2000 users, most use a custom auth scheme (app specific userid/passwd) or google account.
e.g
class AuthLogin(ndb.Polymodel):
user_key = ndb.KeyProperty(kind=User)
status = ndb.StringProperty() # maybe you need to disable a particular login with out deleting it.
date_created = ndb.DatetimeProperty(auto_now_add=True)
#property
def user(self):
return self.user_key.get()
class FacebookLogin(AuthLogin):
# some additional facebook properties
class TwitterLogin(AuthLogin):
# Some additional twitter specific properties
etc...
By using PolyModel as the base class you can do a AuthLogin.query().filter(AuthLogin.user_key == user.key) and get all auth types defined for that user as they all share the same base class AuthLogin. You need this otherwise you would have to query in turn for each supported auth type, as you can not do a kindless query without an ancestor, and in this case we can't use the User as the ancestor becuase then we couldn't do a simple get() to from the login id.
However some things to note, all subclasses of AuthLogin will share the same kind in the key "AuthLogin" so you still need to concatenate the auth_provider and auth_type for the keys id so that you can ensure you have unique keys. E.g.
dev~fish-and-lily> from google.appengine.ext.ndb.polymodel import PolyModel
dev~fish-and-lily> class X(PolyModel):
... pass
...
dev~fish-and-lily> class Y(X):
... pass
...
dev~fish-and-lily> class Z(X):
... pass
...
dev~fish-and-lily> y = Y(id="abc")
dev~fish-and-lily> y.put()
Key('X', 'abc')
dev~fish-and-lily> z = Z(id="abc")
dev~fish-and-lily> z.put()
Key('X', 'abc')
dev~fish-and-lily> y.key.get()
Z(key=Key('X', 'abc'), class_=[u'X', u'Z'])
dev~fish-and-lily> z.key.get()
Z(key=Key('X', 'abc'), class_=[u'X', u'Z'])
This is the problem you ran into. By adding the provider type as part of the key you now get distinct keys.
dev~fish-and-lily> z = Z(id="Zabc")
dev~fish-and-lily> z.put()
Key('X', 'Zabc')
dev~fish-and-lily> y = Y(id="Yabc")
dev~fish-and-lily> y.put()
Key('X', 'Yabc')
dev~fish-and-lily> y.key.get()
Y(key=Key('X', 'Yabc'), class_=[u'X', u'Y'])
dev~fish-and-lily> z.key.get()
Z(key=Key('X', 'Zabc'), class_=[u'X', u'Z'])
dev~fish-and-lily>
I don't believe this is any less convenient a model for you.
Does all that make sense ;-)
While #Greg's answer seems OK, I think it's actually a bad idea to associate an external type/id as a key for your entity, because this solution doesn't scale very well.
What if you would like to implement your own username/password at one point?
What if the user going to delete their Facebook account?
What if the same user wants to sign in with a Twitter account as well?
What if the user has more than one Facebook accounts?
So the idea of having the type/id as key looks weak. A better solution would be to have a field for every type to store only the id. For example facebook_id, twitter_id, google_id etc, then query on these fields to retrieve the actual user. This will happen during sign-in and signup process so it's not that often. Of course you will have to add some logic to add another provider for an already existed user or merge users if the same user signed in with a different provider.
Still the last solution won't work if you want to support multiple sign-ins from the same provider. In order to achieve that you will have to create another model that will store only the external providers/ids and associate them with your user model.
As an example of the second solution you could check my gae-init project where I'm storing the 3 different providers in the User model and working on them in the auth.py module. Again this solution doesn't not scale very well with more providers and doesn't support multiple IDs from the same provider.
Concatenating the user-type with their ID is sensible.
You can save on your read and write costs by not duplicating the type and ID as properties though - when you need to use them, just split the ID back up. (Doing this will be simpler if you include a separator between the parts, '%s|%s' % (provider_type, provider_id) for example)
If you want to use a single model, you can do something like:
class User(ndb.Model):
name = ndb.StringProperty()
email = ndb.StringProperty(required = True)
providers = ndb.KeyProperty(repeated=True)
auser = User(id="auser", name="A user", email="auser#example.com")
auser.providers = [
ndb.Key("ProviderName", "fb", "ProviderId", 123),
ndb.Key("ProviderName", "tw", "ProviderId", 123)
]
auser.put()
To query for a specific FB login, you simple do:
fbkey = ndb.Key("ProviderName", "fb", "ProviderId", 123)
for entry in User.query(User.providers==fbkey):
# Do something with the entry
As ndb does not provide an easy way to create a unique constraint, you could use the _pre_put_hook to ensure that providers is unique.
I have custom object KeywordAccountAssociation__c. This object has three fields
Account__c - Master-Detail(Account)
Keyword__c - Master-Detail(Keyword)
Compositecp__c - Text(255) (External ID) (Unique Case Sensitive)
I have a custom field in Account
DD_Segment__c - multi-picklist
Now I want to update (Insert is fine too) values of DD_Segment__c whenever KeywordAccountAssociation__c is updated. I could write trigger for this but I don't know how? I am new to Salesforce Development and my background is ruby (so getting accustomed to apex is bit difficult for me).
KeywordAccountAssociation__c has multiple rows of Account__c which has same account_id and those account_id are related to a record of custom object Keyword__c. I want to get all keywords related to one account and update in its (account's) multi-picklist. How can I achieve this? If you have doubts about this please do ask. Thanks!
One issue is related to learning to work with triggers in general, which can be started with Salesforce Apex Developer Documents on Triggers
but to answer your actual question, you would essentially need to build a trigger against your custom object that would update the related account. It might look something like this:
trigger keywordAccountUpdate on KeywordAccountAssociation__c (after insert, after update){
set<id> = new set<id>();
for (KeywordAccountAssociation__c a : Trigger.new)
accountIds.put(a.Account__c);
map<id,Account> accountMap = new map<id,Account>([select id, DD_Segment__c from Account where id in :accountIds]);
for (KeywordAccountAssociation__c kaa : Trigger.new){
if (AccountMap.containskey(kaa.Account__c)){
Account thisAccount = AccountMap.get(kaa.Account__c);
String s = thisAccount.DD_Segment__c + ';new value'; // Always add value
if ((thisAccount.DD_Segment__c).contains('second value')
s += ';second value';
AccountsToUpdate.add(new Account(id=thisAccount.id, DD_Segment__c = s));
}
}
}
Please keep in mind that I don't have the structure to test this trigger, I just free handded it, so YMMV.
i have to send an email to a user in salesforce using email template.this template contain merge field type of custom object.
Messaging.SingleEmailMessage mail = new Messaging.SingleEmailMessage();
mail.setTargetObjectId(user.get(0).id);
mail.setTargetObjectId(user.get(0).Id)
mail.setTemplateId(specifier.get(0).Template_id__c);
mail.saveAsActivity = false;
mail.setWhatId(custom_object.Id);
i read in documentation
If you specify a contact for the targetObjectId field, you can specify a whatId as well. This helps to further ensure that merge fields in the template contain the correct data. The value must be one of the following types:
Account
Asset
Campaign
Case
Contract
Opportunity
Order
Product
Solution
Custom
but if we are sending email to a user not to contact then how to assign a custom object for merge field type in custom objects as in the above code
This is a GIGANTIC whole in their email methods, and one that has annoyed me for years. Particularly given workflow email alerts seem to have no problem sending an email template for a user. Alas, you can't use setWhatId() if your target is a user. But you can vote for them to add that functionality,
I've worked around this I typically create a contact with the same name and email as the user, use it to send the email, and then delete it. This works well, although dealing with validation rules on the contact object can be a challenge. See their dev boards for a full discussion.
You can get the template and replace the merge fields as follows:
EmailTemplate template = [SELECT Id, Subject, HtmlValue, Body FROM EmailTemplate WHERE Name = 'Case Update'];
Case modifiedCase = [SELECT Account.Id, Account.Name, Owner.FirstName, Owner.LastName, CaseNumber, Subject, LastModifiedBy.FirstName, LastModifiedBy.LastName from Case where Id=:modifiedCaseId];
String subject = template.Subject;
subject = subject.replace('{!Case.Account}', modifiedCase.Account.Name);
subject = subject.replace('{!Case.CaseNumber}', modifiedCase.CaseNumber);
subject = subject.replace('{!Case.Subject}', modifiedCase.Subject);
String htmlBody = template.HtmlValue;
htmlBody = htmlBody.replace('{!Case.Account}', modifiedCase.Account.Name);
htmlBody = htmlBody.replace('{!Case.OwnerFullName}', ownerFullName);
...
Messaging.SingleEmailMessage email = new Messaging.SingleEmailMessage();
email.setSubject(subject);
email.setHtmlBody(htmlBody);
Messaging.sendEmail(new Messaging.SingleEmailMessage[] {email});
As far as no new fields are added in the template this will work fine. The admin can mess with the format of the email without the need for code changes.
Not sure this is possible to do, but it depends on the relationship between your custom object and your users that will be receiving the merged emails. Do you have a 1-to-1 relationship between User and CustomObject? If so, perhaps adding a reference to the single custom object instance that each user object references and then adding custom formula fields on your user object with CustomObject__r.CustomField__c would do the trick.
In a custom formula field on your User object:
TEXT(CustomObject__r.CustomField__c)
Then your template could be changed into a User template and the merge fields would be the formula fields that actually pointed to your custom object instance. But if you have some other relationship like 1-to-many or many-to-many between User and CustomObject__c, I think you're out of luck.
I want to create two objects and link them via a parent child relationship in C# using the Metadata API.
I can create objects and 'custom' fields for the objects via the metadata, but the service just ignores the field def for the relationship.
By snipet for the fields are as follows:
CustomField[] fields = new CustomField[] { new CustomField()
{
type = FieldType.Text,
label = "FirstName",
length = 50,
lengthSpecified = true,
fullName = "LJUTestObject__c.FirstName__c"
},
new CustomField()
{
type = FieldType.Text,
label = "LastName",
length = 50,
lengthSpecified = true,
fullName = "LJUTestObject__c.Lastname__c"
},
new CustomField()
{
type = FieldType.Text,
label = "Postcode",
length = 50,
lengthSpecified = true,
fullName = "LJUTestChildObject__c.Postcode__c"
},
new CustomField()
{
type = FieldType.MasterDetail,
relationshipLabel = "PostcodeLookup",
relationshipName = "LJUTestObject__c.LJUTestObject_Id__c",
relationshipOrder = 0,
relationshipOrderSpecified = true,
fullName = "LJUTestChildObject__c.Lookup__r"
}
};
The parent object looks like:
LJUTestObject
ID,
FirstName, Text(50)
LastName, Text(50)
The child objext looks like:
LJUTestChildObject
ID,
Postcode, Text(50)
I want to link the parent to the child so one "LJUTestObject", can have many "LJUTestChildObjects".
What values do I need for FieldType, RelationshipName, and RelationshipOrder to make this happen?
TL;DR:
Use this as a template for accomplishing what you want:
var cf = new CustomField();
cf.fullName = "ChildCustomObject__c.ParentCustomField__c";
cf.type = FieldType.MasterDetail;
cf.typeSpecified = true;
cf.label = "Parent Or Whatever You Want This To Be Called In The UI";
cf.referenceTo = "ParentCustomObject__c";
cf.relationshipName = "ParentOrWhateverYouWantThisToBeCalledInternally";
cf.relationshipLabel = "This is an optional label";
var aUpsertResponse = smc.upsertMetadata(metadataSession, null, null, new Metadata[] { cf });
The key difference:
The natural temptation is to put the CustomField instances into the fields array of a CustomObject, and pass that CustomObject to the Salesforce Metadata API. And this does work for most data fields, but it seems that it does not work for relationship fields.
Instead, pass the CustomField directly to the Salesforce Metadata API, not wrapped in a CustomObject.
Those muted errors:
Turns out that errors are occurring, and the Salesforce Metadata API knows about them, but doesn't bother telling you about them when they occur for CustomFields nested inside a CustomObject.
By passing the CustomField directly to the Metadata API (not wrapped in a CustomObject), the call to upsertMetadata will still return without an exception being thrown (as it was already doing for you), but this time, if something goes wrong, upsertResponse[0].success will be false instead of true, and upsertResponse[0].errors will give you more information.
Other gotchas
Must specify referenceTo, and if it doesn't match the name of an existing built-in or custom object, the error message will be the same as if you had not specified referenceTo at all.
fullName should end in __c not __r. __r is for relationship names, but remember that fullName is specifying the field name, not the relationship name.
relationshipName - I got it working by not including __r on the end, and not including the custom object name at the start. I haven't tested to be sure other ways don't work, but be aware that at the very least, you don't need to have those extra components in the relationshipName.
Remember generally that anything with label in its name is probably for display to users in the UI, and thus can have spaces in it to be nicely formatted the way users expect.
Salesforce... really???
(mini rant warning)
The Salesforce Metadata API is unintuitive and poorly documented. That's why you got stuck on such a simple thing. That's why no-one knew the answer to your question. That's why, four years later, I got stuck on the same thing. Creating relationships is one of the main things you would want to do with the Salesforce Metadata API, and yet it has been this difficult to figure out, for this long. C'mon Salesforce, we know you're a sales company more than a tech company, but you earn trazillions of dollars and are happy to show it off - invest a little more in a better API experience for the developers who invest in learning your platform.
I've not created these through the meta data API like this myself, but I'd suggest that:
relationshipName = "LJUTestObject__c.LJUTestObject_Id__c
Should be:
relationshipName = "LJUTestObject__c.Id
as Id is a standard field, the __c suffix is only used for custom fields (not standard fields on custom objects). Also, it may be that the relationship full name should end in __c not __r, but try the change above first and see how you go.
SELECT
Id,
OwnerId,
WhatId,
Reminder_Date_Time__c,
WhoId,
Record_Type_Name__c,
Task_Type__c,
Assigned_Date__c,
Task_Status__c,
ActivityDate,
Subject,
Attended_By__c,
Is_Assigned__c
FROM Task
WHERE
(NOT Task_Status__c LIKE 'Open') AND
ActivityDate >= 2017-12-13 AND
(NOT Service__r.Service_State__c LIKE 'Karnataka')