how to pass parameters into an invocable method sf? - salesforce

Public class AutoConvertLeads
{
#InvocableMethod
public static void LeadAssign(List<Id> LeadIds)
{
Database.LeadConvert Leadconvert = new Database.LeadConvert();
Leadconvert.setLeadId(LeadIds[0]);
lead l= [SELECT Id, email FROM Lead WHERE id=:LeadIds[0]];
LeadStatus Leads= [SELECT Id, MasterLabel FROM LeadStatus WHERE IsConverted=true LIMIT 1];
contact[] clist=[select id,name,session__c from contact where email=:l.email limit 1 ];
if(clist.size()>0){
contact c=clist[0];
c.session__c='PUT_THE_VALUE_YOU_WANT_TO_UPDATE_THE_FIELD_WITH'; //Make sure you are inserting value according to field type.
update c;
}
else{
Leadconvert.setConvertedStatus(Leads.MasterLabel);
Leadconvert.setDoNotCreateOpportunity(TRUE); //Remove this line if you want to create an opportunity from Lead Conversion
Database.LeadConvertResult Leadconverts = Database.convertLead(Leadconvert);
System.assert(Leadconverts.isSuccess());
}
}
}
The session value comes from web to lead form depending on person signing up. It's a picklist. The values are dates as mentioned - May 24; 2 PM - 4 PM, June 28; 9 AM - 12 PM, May 24; 10 AM -12 PM, June 28; 4:30 PM - 7:30 PM, July 26; 9 AM - 12 PM, July 26; 4:30 PM - 7:30 PM.
How can I pass these values into this trigger code for c.session__c ?

In trigger code all the properties from the object are available, so in this case all the properties of led will be available so if you have a trigger like this
trigger LeadTrigger on Lead (before insert){
for(Lead l : Trigger.new){
System.debug(l.Session__c);
}
}
That would print out the session__ field from the lead. If you want to pass the value as a function param you could do it like:
SomeClass.someStaticMethod(l.Session__c);
//or
new SomeClass().someMethod(l.Session__c);
However it might be easier to pass the entire lead record from the trigger or if you pass the ids query the exact fields that you need from the lead in the method.
But from your code it looks like what you want to do is
contact c = clist[0];
c.session__c = l.MasterLabel;
update c;
Or whatever the field is on lead that you want. But since you want to map a field on lead to a field on contact why not use lead mapping functionality?
EDIT
I Think the title is misleading, I think you meant to ask how to pass params from a trigger into this invocable method. From the documentation
Triggers can’t reference invocable methods
However this can be done via flows and the process builder, so that might be worth looking into.
On a side note you code is not bulkified at all and would lead unexpected results if multiple lead its were passed in with different session codes. You probably should create a Map> for converted leads where the key is the email (normalized) an the list is a list of converted leads. Query contacts by the list map keySet() and build a Map where the key is the email (normalized) and do the update value to the lead.whatever__c and up the contact map values
To pass values to the method you listed you would do
List<Id> leadIds = new List<Id>();
for(Lead l : [SELECT Id FROM Lead]){ //the query here is an example u can have a list already available
leadIds.add(l.Id);
}
AutoConvertLeads.LeadAssign(leadIds);
But u cant do this from a trigger not directly becuase the doc indicate that it isn't permitted. You could test to see if you could do it from another class indirectly but I haven't tested that.

Related

How to display Map's list value based on 1 key in Apex Salesforce?

Hello beautiful people,
I have a scenario where I am defining a Map with string key and a list. Now, I want to put values in a list one by one and also display them using the single Key. Example code -
Map<string,List<Account>> accountMap = new Map<string,List<Account>>();
//How to insert values. I am using this but no luck-
for(Account acc = [Select Id, Name from Account]){
accountMap(acc.Id,accList)
}
//Lets say we have data. How to display any **specific** value from the middle of the list. I am using this but no luck-
AccountList.get(id).get(3);
Please help.
Using account id as example is terrible idea because they'll be unique -> your lists would always have size 0. But yes, you should be able to do something like that.
Your stuff doesn't even compile, you can't use "=" in for(Account acc = [SELECT...]).
Let's say you have accounts and some of them have duplicate names. This would be close to what you need:
Map<string,List<Account>> accountMap = new Map<string,List<Account>>();
for(Account acc : [SELECT Name, Description FROM Account LIMIT 100]){
if(accountMap.containsKey(acc.Name)){
accountMap.get(acc.Name).add(acc);
} else {
accountMap.put(acc.Id, new List<Account>{acc});
}
}
and then yes, if you'd have the key you can access accountMap.get('Acme Inc.')[0].Id

System.TypeException: Cannot have more than 10 chunks in a single operation

I have this very weird error, "System.TypeException: Cannot have more than 10 chunks in a single operation", has anyone seen/encountered this before ? Please can you guide me if you know how to solve this.
I am trying to insert different types of sObjects together in a list of sObject. The list is never larger than 10 rows.
This post here:
https://developer.salesforce.com/forums/ForumsMain?id=906F000000090nUIAQ
suggests that it is not the number of different sObjects, but the order of the objects that causes this chunk limit to be exceeded. In other words, "1,1,1,2,2,2" has one chunk, the transition from "1" to "2". "1,2,3,4,5,6" has six chunks, even though the number of elements is the same. Putting the objects into the list sorted in object order is the suggested solution.
Is it possible for you to create a reasonable test case with only 2 or 3 rows?
There are two possible explanations for this issue:
As Jagular noted, you did not order the sobjects you tried to insert, so there are more than 10 'chunks' in the list.
You try to insert > 2000 records, and > 1 sobject type. This one seems like a Salesforce Bug, since the error message doesn't match the issue.
Scenario 1 and its solution
When you have a hybrid list, make sure that the objects are not scattered without any order. For example, A,B,A,B,A,B,A,B…. Salesforce has an inherent trouble in switching sObject types for more than 10 times. They call this switching limit as Chunking Limit. So, on this hybrid list, if you would have sorted it and then passed it for DML, Salesforce would have been much happier. For example. A,A,A,A,B,B,B,B… In this case, salesforce only has to switch one time (that is read all A objects –>switch –> read all B objects). The max chunk limit is 10. So, here we are safe.
listToUpdate.sort();
UPDATE listToUpdate;
Scenario 2 and its solution
Another point that we have to bear in our mind is that if the hybrid list contains more number of objects for one type, we can run into TypeException. As mentioned in the screenshot, if list contains 1001 objects of type A and 1001 objects of type B, then total objects is equal to 2002. The maximum chunks allowed is 10. So, if you do a simple math, the number of objects in each chunk would be 2002/10 = 200. Salesforce also enforces another governor limit that each chunk should not contain 200 or more than 200 objects. In this case, we will have to foresee how much objects are possible to enter this code and we have to write code to pass lists of safe size for DML every time.
Scenario 3 and its solution
Scenario 3 and its solution
Third scenario that can happen is if the hybrid list contains objects of more than 10 types, then even if the size of the list if very small, switching happens when salesforce reads different sObject. So, we have to make sure that in this case, we allot separate lists for each sObject type and then pass it on for DML. Doing this in an apex trigger or apex class would cause you some trouble as multiple DML’s are initiated in a context. Passing this kind of multiple sObject lists for DML operations in a different context would really ease up the load you pump into the platform. Consider doing this kind of logic in a Batch Apex Job rather than a apex trigger or apex class.
Hope this helps.
Below a code that should cover all 3 Scenario from Arpit Sethi.
It's a piece of code I took from this topic: https://developer.salesforce.com/forums/?id=906F000000090nUIAQ.
and modified to cover Scenario 2.
private static void saveSobjectSet(List <Sobject> listToUpdate) {
Integer SFDC_CHUNK_LIMIT = 10;
// Developed this part due to System.TypeException: Cannot have more than 10 chunks in a single operation
Map<String, List<Sobject>> sortedMapPerObjectType = new Map<String, List<Sobject>>();
Map<String, Integer> numberOf200ChunkPerObject = new Map<String, Integer>();
for (Sobject obj : listToUpdate) {
String objTypeREAL = String.valueOf(obj.getSObjectType());
if (! numberOf200ChunkPerObject.containsKey(objTypeREAL)){
numberOf200ChunkPerObject.put(objTypeREAL, 1);
}
// Number of 200 chunk for a given Object
Integer numnberOf200Record = numberOf200ChunkPerObject.get(objTypeREAL);
// Object type + number of 200 records chunk
String objTypeCURRENT = String.valueOf(obj.getSObjectType()) + String.valueOf(numnberOf200Record);
// CurrentList
List<sObject> currentList = sortedMapPerObjectType.get(objTypeCURRENT);
if (currentList == null || currentList.size() > 199) {
if(currentList != null && currentList.size() > 199){
numberOf200ChunkPerObject.put(objTypeREAL, numnberOf200Record + 1);
objTypeCURRENT = String.valueOf(obj.getSObjectType()) + String.valueOf(numnberOf200Record);
}
sortedMapPerObjectType.put(objTypeCURRENT, new List<Sobject>());
}
sortedMapPerObjectType.get(objTypeCURRENT).add(obj);
}
while(sortedMapPerObjectType.size() > 0) {
// Create a new list, which can contain a max of chunking limit, and sorted, so we don't get any errors
List<Sobject> safeListForChunking = new List<Sobject>();
List<String> keyListSobjectType = new List<String>(sortedMapPerObjectType.keySet());
for (Integer i = 0;i<SFDC_CHUNK_LIMIT && !sortedMapPerObjectType.isEmpty();i++) {
List<Sobject> listSobjectOfOneType = sortedMapPerObjectType.remove(keyListSobjectType.remove(0));
safeListForChunking.addAll(listSobjectOfOneType);
}
update safeListForChunking;
}
}
Hope it helps,
Bye
Hi i kind of deviced a simple way to sort a list of different sobject types
public List<Sobject> SortRecordsByType(List<Sobject> records){
List<Sobject> response = new List<Sobject>();
Map<string,List<Sobject>> sortDictionary = new Map<string,List<Sobject>>();
for(Sobject record : records){
string objectTypeName = record.getSobjectType().getDescribe().getName();
if(sortDictionary.containsKey(objectTypeName)){
sortDictionary.get(objectTypeName).add(record);
}else{
sortDictionary.put(objectTypeName , new List<Sobject>{record});
}
}
// arrange in order
for(string objectName : sortDictionary.keySet()){
response.addAll(sortDictionary.get(objectName));
}
return response;
}
hopefully this solves your problem .

change a db from a certain point in time, when the change doesn't fit the already existing data

I have a model that looks like this:
class Report(models.Model):
updater = models.CharField(max_length=15)
pub_date = models.DateTimeField(auto_add_now=True)
identifier = models.CharField(max_length=100)
... and so on...
There are some more fields but they are irrelevant to the question. Now the site has very simple functions - the users can see older reports and their data, and can edit them or add new ones.
However, the identifier field is actually an integer that symbolizes a log file that is being reported. Most of the times, each report has one log. But sometimes it has more than one. I did it as a CharField because I built the site to replace an older sharepoint 2003 website, where that field was treated as simple text. So I want that in my next version, it would be like it should be, i.e. like this:
class Report(models.Model):
updater = models.CharField(max_length=15)
pub_date = models.DateTimeField(auto_add_now=True)
... and so on...
class Log(models.Model):
report = models.ForeignKey(Report)
identifier = models.IntegerField()
The problem is, since in the old site that field was a CharField, people used this as they liked. Meaning, even if they updated various logs in the same report they just did it like this <logid1>, <logid2>. Sometimes they added some text <logid1> which is related to <logid2>.
So I want to change this, but I don't want to lose all the old data, and I can't fix all those edge cases (the DB contains around 22 thousand reports). I thought about adding this to report:
def disp_id(self):
if self.pub_date < ... #the day I'll do the update
return self.identifier
else:
return ', '.join([log.identifier for log in self.log_set.all()])
But then I'm not really getting rid of the old field now am I? I'm just adding a new one and keeping the original null from a certain date.
As far as I know, what I want to do is impossible. I'm only asking because I know that maybe I'm not the first one to deal with this sort of thing and maybe there is a solution that I'm not aware of.
Hope my explanation is clear enough, thanks in advance!
class Report(models.Model):
updater = models.CharField(max_length=15)
pub_date = models.DateTimeField(auto_add_now=True)
identifier = models.CharField(null=True)
... and so on...
logs = models.ManyToManyField(Log,null=True)
class Log(models.Model):
identifier = models.IntegerField()
Make the above model , and then make a script as follow:
ident_list = []
for reports in Report.objects.all():
identifiers = reports.identifiers.split(',')
for idents in identifiers:
if not idents in ident_list:
log = Log.create(**{'identifier' : int(idents)})
ident_list.append(int(idents))
else:
log = Log.objects.get(identifier = int(idents))
report.log.add(log)
Check the data before removing the column identifiers from the table Report.
Does it solves your purpose now ?

Document status that depend on the user type object

I have the following objects: L1User, L2User, L3User (all inherits from User) and Document.
Every user can create the document but depending on the user type, the document will have a different status. So in case it's L1User, the document will be created with L1 status and so on:
Solution 1
Please note that after document is created, it will be saved in the database, so it should be natural to have a method create_document(User user) in Document object. In the method body I could check which type is the user and set manually appropriate status. Such approach seems rather not OOP to me.
Solution 2
Ok, so the next approach would be to have all users implement a common method (say create_document(Document doc)) which will set a status associated with the user and save the document in the database. My doubt here is that the document should be saved in it's own class, not the user.
Solution 3
So the final approach would similar to the above, except that the user will return modified document object to it's create_document(User user) method and save will be performed there. The definition of the method would be like this:
create_document(User user)
{
this = user.create_document(this);
this->save();
}
It also doesn't seems right to me...
Can anyone suggest a better approach?
I think that both Solutions 2 and 3 are ok from the OO point of view, since you are properly delegating the status assignment to the user object (contrary to solution 1, whare you are basically doing a switch based on the user type). Whether to choose 2 or 3 is more a matter of personal tastes.
However, I have a doubt: why do you pass a document to a create_document() method? I would go for a message name that best describes what it does. For example, in solution 3 (the one I like the most) I would go for:
Document>>create_document(User user)
{
this = user.create_document();
this->save();
}
and then
L1User>>create_document()
{
return new Document('L1');
}
or
Document>>create_document(User user)
{
this = new Document()
this = user.set_document_type(this);
this->save();
}
and then
L1User>>set_document_type(document)
{
document.setType('L1');
}
Edit: I kept thinking about this and there is actually a fourth solution. However the following approach works only if the status of a document doesn't change through its lifetime and you can map the DB field with a getter instead of a property. Since the document already knows the user and the status depends on the user, you can just delegate:
Document>>getStatus()
{
return this.user.getDocumentStatus();
}
HTH

How do I avoid STANDARD_PRICE_NOT_DEFINED when unit-testing an OpportunityLineItem in Apex v24.0?

Apparently a new feature of the Spring '12 / v24.0 release of Apex in Salesforce.com is that unit tests no longer have access to 'real' data -- thus (if I'm understanding the change correctly) a SOQL query will now only retrieve objects that have been inserted during the course of the unit test -- and even that is subject to some limitations.
At any rate this seems to throw OpportunityLineItem testing out the window, because:
It's impossible to insert an OpportunityLineItem without a PriceBookEntryId, BUT
You can't insert a new price-book entry for product X unless you already have a Standard Price Book entry for product X, BUT
There isn't a Standard Price Book in the test data because the Pricebook2 table, like all tables, is effectively empty at the beginning of the unit-test run, AND
There's no way to create a Standard Price Book in Apex
I'm really hoping I got at least one of those four points wrong, but so far no variation on my existing unit-tests has shown any of them to be wrong. Which of course means my unit tests no longer work. This happened literally overnight -- the tests ran fine in my sandbox on Friday, and now they fail.
Am I missing something, or is this a bug in the new SFDC release?
There is new functionality introduced in Summer 14, you can now use Test.getStandardPricebookId() to get the standard pricebook ID without having to set SeeAllData to True.
Firstly, to put your mind at ease, there are no plans ever to deprecate the seeAllData flag. We're not going to pull the rug out from under you. As to the creation of standard price book in an apex test, I'm not sure. There are, I'm sure, several areas where testing without existing data is difficult on the platform today, which is one reason why the seeAllData flag is there. We'll be trying to close those gaps in the next few releases.
I just ran into this, and although your post is old, it's the first result on Google so I thought I'd share what I did.
My basic architecture is a test class that calls a utility class to as a way of creating test data on the fly (there are other ways, this is my habit).
Short version:
set see all data to true
make sure the standard price book is active
add a pricebook entry for the standard price book - flag as active
add a pricebook entry for you test price book - flag as active
Test class:
#isTest (seeAllData=true)
public with sharing class RMA_SelectLineItemsControllerTest {
static testmethod void testBasicObjects() {
Pricebook2 standard = [Select Id, Name, IsActive From Pricebook2 where IsStandard = true LIMIT 1];
if (!standard.isActive) {
standard.isActive = true;
update standard;
}
Pricebook2 pb = RMA_TestUtilities.createPricebook();
Product2 prod = RMA_TestUtilities.createProduct();
PricebookEntry pbe = RMA_TestUtilities.createPricebookEntry(standard,pb,prod);
}
}
The utility method look like this (only showing that around the new PBE):
public static PricebookEntry createPricebookEntry (Pricebook2 standard, Pricebook2 newPricebook, Product2 prod) {
System.debug('***** starting one');
PricebookEntry one = new PricebookEntry();
one.pricebook2Id = standard.id;
one.product2id = prod.id;
one.unitprice = 1249.0;
one.isactive = true;
insert one;
System.debug('***** one complete, ret next');
PricebookEntry ret = new PricebookEntry();
ret.pricebook2Id = newPricebook.id;
ret.product2id = prod.id;
ret.unitprice = 1250.0;
ret.isactive = true;
insert ret;
return ret;
}
Another work around would be to make your trigger be aware of being run in a test using Test.isRunningTest(), but I think this solution misses the point of best practice, which I believe is the whole point of making tests isolated from pre-existing data.
Perhaps Salesforce could make the Pricebook2.isStandard field writeable if code is running in the context of a test, or the specific Standard Price Book record should be given the same status as User and Profile??
Please let me know if anyone has used Test.getStandardPricebookId() and able to insert opportunity line item in test class. I tried this method with below mentioned code but got an error ": STANDARD_PRICE_NOT_DEFINED, No standard price defined for this product: []".
Note: I have seeAllData=false
ID standardPBID = Test.getStandardPricebookId();
PriceBook2 pb = new PriceBook2();
pb.name = 'GEW Water CMS';
pb.isActive=true;
insert pb;
Product2 prod= new Product2();
prod.name='TestProd';
prod.productcode='4568';
prod.isActive=true;
insert prod;
PricebookEntry standardPrice = new PricebookEntry(Pricebook2Id = standardPBID, Product2Id = prod.Id, UnitPrice = 10000, IsActive = true, currencyISOCode='USD' );
PriceBookEntry pbe= new PricebookEntry(pricebook2id=pb.id, product2id=prod.id,unitprice=2000, isActive=true, currencyISOCode='EUR');
insert pbe;
OpportunityLineItem oli = new OpportunityLineItem(OpportunityId = OppList[0].Id, pricebookentryid=pbe.id, UnitPrice = 100, Quantity = 1);
insert oli;

Resources