I am using a lead map where the first id represents an Account ID and the List resembles a list of leads linked to that account such as: Map<id, List<Id> > leadMap = new Map< id, List<id> >();
My question stands as following: Knowing a Lead's Id how do I get the related Account's Id from the map. My code looks something like this, The problems is on the commented out line.
for (Lead l : leads){
Lead newLead = new Lead(id=l.id);
if (l.Company != null) {
// newLead.Account__c = leadMap.keySet().get(l.id);
leads_to_update.add(newLead);
}
}
You could put all lead id and mapping company id in the trigger then get the company id
Map<string,string> LeadAccountMapping = new Map<string,string>();//key is Lead id ,Company id
for(Lead l:trigger.new)
{
LeadAccountMapping.put(l.id,l.Company);
}
//put the code you want to get the company id
string companyid= LeadAccountMapping.get(l.id);
Let me make sure I understand your problem.
Currently you have a map that uses the Account ID as the key to a value of a List of Lead IDs - So the map is -> List. Correct?
Your goal is to go from Lead ID to the Account ID.
If this is correct, then you are in a bad way, because your current structure requires a very slow, iterative search. The correct code would look like this (replace your commented line with this code):
for( ID actID : leadMap.keySet() ) {
for( ID leadID : leadMap.get( actId ) ) {
if( newLead.id == leadID ) {
newLead.Account__c = actId;
leads_to_update.add(newLead);
break;
}
}
}
I don't like this solution because it requires iterating over a Map and then over each of the lists in each of the values. It is slow.
If this isn't bulkified code, you could do a Select Query and get the Account__c value from the existing Lead by doing:
newLead.Account__c = [ SELECT Account__c FROM Lead WHERE Id = :l.id LIMIT 1];
However, this relies on your code not looping over this line and hitting a governor limit.
Or you could re-write your code soe that your Map is actually:
Map<ID, List<Leads>> leadMap = Map<ID, List<Leads>>();
Then in your query where you build the map you ensure that your Lead also includes the Account__c field.
Any of these options should work, it all depends on how this code snippet in being executed and where.
Good luck!
Related
I have a Text field that has semicolon separated codes. These code has to be replaced with the description. I have separate map that have code and description. There is a trigger that replace the code with their description. the data will loaded using the dataloader in this field. I am afraid, it might not work for large amount of data since I had to use inner for loops. Is there any way I can achieve this without inner for loops?
public static void updateStatus(Map<Id,Account> oldMap,Map < Id, Account > newMap)
{
Map<String,String> DataMap = new Map<String,String>();
List<Data_Mapper__mdt> DataMapList = [select Salseforce_Value__c,External_Value__c from Data_Mapper__mdt where
active__c = true AND Field_API_Name__c= :CUSTOMFIELD_MASSTATUS AND
Object_API_Name__c= :OBJECT_ACCOUNT];
for(Data_Mapper__mdt dataMapRec: DataMapList){
DataMap.put(dataMapRec.External_Value__c,dataMapRec.Salseforce_Value__c);
}
for(Account objAcc : newMap.values())
{
if(objAcc.Status__c != ''){
String updatedDescription='';
List<String> delimitedList = objAcc.Status__c.split('; ');
for(String Code: delimitedList) {
updatedDescription = DataMap.get(Code);
}
objAcc.Status__c = updatedDescription;
}
It should be fine. You have a map-based access acting like a dictionary, you have a query outside of the loop. Write an unit test that populates close to 200 accounts (that's how the trigger will be called in every data loader iteration). There could be some concerns if you'd have thousands of values in that Status__c but there's not much that can be done to optimise it.
But I want to ask you 3 things.
The way you wrote it the updatedDescription will always contain the last decoded value. Are you sure you didn't want to write something like updatedDescription += DataMap.get(Code) + ';'; or maybe add them to a List<String> and then call String.join on it. It looks bit weird. If you truly want first or last element - I'd add break; or really just access the last element of the split (and then you're right, you're removing the inner loop). But written like that this looks... weird.
Have you thought about multiple runs. I mean if there's a workflow rule/flow/process builder - you might enter this code again. And because you're overwriting the field I think it'll completely screw you over.
Map<String, String> mapping = new Map<String, String>{
'one' => '1',
'two' => '2',
'three' => '3',
'2' => 'lol'
};
String text = 'one;two';
List<String> temp = new List<String>();
for(String key : text.split(';')){
temp.add(mapping.get(key));
}
text = String.join(temp, ';');
System.debug(text); // "1;2"
// Oh noo, a workflow caused my code to run again.
// Or user edited the account.
temp = new List<String>();
for(String key : text.split(';')){
temp.add(mapping.get(key));
}
text = String.join(temp, ';');
System.debug(text); // "lol", some data was lost
// And again
temp = new List<String>();
for(String key : text.split(';')){
temp.add(mapping.get(key));
}
text = String.join(temp, ';');
System.debug(text); // "", empty
Are you even sure you need this code. Salesforce is perfectly fine with having separate picklist labels (what's visible to the user) and api values (what's saved to database, referenced in Apex, validation rules...). Maybe you don't need this transformation at all. Maybe your company should look into Translation Workbench. Or even ditch this code completely and do some search-replace before invoking data loader, in some real ETL tool (or even MS Excel)
I have three objects
1)Truck__c
2)Booking__C
3)Payment___C.
Truck and Booking has master detail relationship where Truckk is master and Booking is detail.
Booking and payment has lookup relationship where Booking is parent and payment is child.
I want to update a field present isBooked(checkbox) in Truck based on the value present in a field remainingAmount in payment object. I have added trigger on Payment object like below
trigger TestTrigger on Payment__c (after insert) {
if(Trigger.isAfter && Trigger.isUpdate){
for (Payment__c pay:Trigger.New)
{
payId.add(pay.id);
paidAmount =Integer.valueOf(pay.Paid_Amount__c);
}
Map <id,Booking__c> bookingMap = new Map <id,Booking__c> ();
for (Booking__c obj: [Select Id, Booking_ID__c from Booking__c where Booking_ID__c in:payId])
{
bookingMap.put(obj.Booking_ID__c, obj);
}
for(Booking__c objBooking:matchingIdsMap){
Truck__c truckObj = [Select id,Price__c from Truck__c where Truck__c.id = objBooking.Truck__c.id];
//Integer paidAmount = Payment__c.Paid_Amount__c;
Integer totalAmount = Integer.valueOf(truckObj.Price__c);
Integer remainingAmount = totalAmount-paidAmount;
If(remainingAmount == 0){
truckObj.Booked__c = true
}
update truckObj;
}
}
}
Here first I am getting payment ID's and based on that I am fetching Booking objects which is lookup parent of payment. After this I am trying to fetch the truck object which is master of Booking. But I don't know how to query on this as where clause in query giving error
Truck__c truckObj = [Select id,Price__c from Truck__c where Truck__c.id = objBooking.Truck__c.id];
Please note there is no direct relationship between Truck and Payment
How can I fetch truck object
Thanks in Advance
Short answer: while referring to parent fields, you should use the relationship name, so Truck__r instead of Truck__c.
Anyway it is not the only problem with that code.
Long answer:
your trigger is in after insert, but you check for an after update event: if(Trigger.isAfter && Trigger.isUpdate). Probably you want to run this trigger in both after insert and after update.
You never declared payId nor paidAmount which you use in your first for-loop. Anyway paidAmount would just hold the last value, which probably you won't need.
[Select Id, Booking_ID__c from Booking__c where Booking_ID__c in:payId] this query should return an empty list because in payId you've stored the ids of Payment__c, that is a child of Booking__c, while in the first loop you should have stored the ids of parents Booking__c
[Select id,Price__c from Truck__c where Truck__c.id = objBooking.Truck__c.id] Here there is no reason to write where Truck__c.id It should be just WHERE Id = :objBooking.Truck__c.
Beware: putting a SOQL in a loop you will easily hit the Governor Limit about SOQL, which will raise a System.LimitException: Too many SOQL queries: 101.
The same goes by putting a DML in a loop.
I'm going to assume that the API Name of the lookup fields is the same of the parent object, so that a Booking__c field exists on Payment__c object and a Truck__c exists on Booking__c object.
If I got the logic right about how setting the flag on Truck object, this should be the trigger code.
trigger TestTrigger on Payment__c (after insert, after update) {
if(Trigger.isAfter && (Trigger.isInsert || Trigger.isUpdate)) {
Map<Id, List<Payment__c>> mapBookingIdPaymentList = new Map<Id, List<Payment__c>>();
for (Payment__c pay : Trigger.New) {
List<Payment__c> paymentList = mapBookingIdPaymentList.get(pay.Booking__c);
if (paymentList == null) {
paymentList = new List<Payment__c>();
mapBookingIdPaymentList.put(pay.Booking__c, paymentList);
}
paymentList.add(pay);
}
Map<Id, Decimal> mapTruckPrice = new Map<Id, Decimal>();
Map<Id, Integer> mapTruckRemainingAmount = new Map<Id, Integer>();
for (Booking__c booking: [SELECT Id, Truck__c, Truck__r.Price__c FROM Booking__c WHERE Id IN :mapBookingIdPaymentList.keySet()]) {
mapTruckPrice.put(booking.Truck__c, booking.Truck__r.Price__c);
Integer sumOfRemainingAmount = mapTruckRemainingAmount.containsKey(booking.Truck__c) ? mapTruckRemainingAmount.get(booking.Truck__c) : 0;
for (Payment__c pay : mapBookingIdPaymentList.get(booking.Id)) {
sumOfRemainingAmount += pay.Paid_Amount__c != null ? pay.Paid_Amount__c.intValue() : 0;
}
mapTruckRemainingAmount.put(booking.Truck__c, sumOfRemainingAmount);
}
List<Truck__c> trucksToUpdate = new List<Truck__c>();
for (Id truckId : mapTruckPrice.keySet()) {
// There is no need to query a record just to update it if you already have its Id.
Truck__c truck = new Truck__c(Id = truckId);
truck.Booked__c = mapTruckPrice.get(truckId) - mapTruckRemainingAmount.get(truckId) == 0;
trucksToUpdate.add(truck);
}
update trucksToUpdate; // dml outside the loop
}
}
By the way, you should move the logic in an handler class, following the best practices.
I'm trying to combine 3 separate SOQL queries into one, but still end up with 3 separate lists for ease of use and readability later.
List<Object__c> objectList = [SELECT Name, Id, Parent_Object__r.Name, Parent_Object__r.Id,
(SELECT Name, Id FROM Child_Objects__r)
FROM Object__c];
I know I can get a list of child objects thus:
List<Child_Object__c> childObjectList = new List<Child_Object__c>();
for(Object__c object : objectList){
childObjectList.addAll(object.Child_Objects__r);
}
How would I go about adding the Parent_Object__c records to their own list?
I'm assuming a map could be used to deal with duplicates, but how do I get this Parent_Object__c data into that map?
You are basically there.
All lookup fields are available in your example as object.Parent_Object__r. Use a Set to natively avoid duplicates. No deduping required on your part!
Set<Parent_Object__c> parentObjectSet = new Set<Parent_Object__c>();
List<Child_Object__c> childObjectList = new List<Child_Object__c>();
for(Object__c object : objectList){
childObjectList.addAll(object.Child_Objects__r);
parentObjectSet.add(object.Parent_Object__r);
}
Edit:
As per #eyescream (trust him!) you are indeed better off with a map to avoid duplicates.
So the above code would just be slightly different:
Map<Id, Parent_Object__c> parentObjectMap = new Map<Id, Parent_Object__c>();
List<Child_Object__c> childObjectList = new List<Child_Object__c>();
for(Object__c object : objectList){
childObjectList.addAll(object.Child_Objects__r);
if (object.Parent_Object__r != null) {
parentObjectMap.put(object.Parent_Object__r.Id, object.Parent_Object__r);
}
}
I'm trying to create two spreadsheets: one tracks student attendance at school, the other tracks their attendance at Track practice. The goal is to write a function, that I can set up as a button, that I can click that will automatically send emails to several people if the student is present at school but is absent for sports without getting excused.
Right now, the whole thing is working pretty well, but I have one issue. I have a column that will read "Good" or "Bad" depending on whether the student meets the above condition. The function turns these into an array. I would like to use the index of the "Bad"'s to find the necessary email addresses, which are stored at the same index point in another array that I make from the spreadsheet. I'm not sure how to save this index point and use it to reference the email addresses. Code below.
function sendEmailsMonday() {
var sheet = SpreadsheetApp.getActiveSpreadsheet().getSheetByName("TrackAttendance");
var dataRange = sheet.getRange("D2:D30");
var data = dataRange.getValues();// Gets array of "Good" and "Bad"
for (i in data) {
if(i = "Bad") {
var place = data.indexOf(i);
var dataRange2 = sheet.getRange("M2:M30");// Gets array of email addresses
var data2 = dataRange2.getValues();
var emailAddress = data2[place];
var message = "This is an automated email informing you that your child/advisee ____ was present at school today, but missed Track without being excused. Feel free to email Mr. # with any questions.";
var subject = "___ missed Track Practice";
MailApp.sendEmail(emailAddress, subject, message);
return;
}
}
}
So, the issue comes in with the index lines. If I get rid of
var place = data.indexOf(i);
and replace
var emailAddress = data[place];
with
var emailAddress = data[28];
or any other number, it will grab the email address and send it. But then it has nothing to do with the values in the other column.
Seems like this should be an easy fix but I'm bad at this.
Very late responding now. I think you are almost there.
Your IF statement should read:
if(i == "Bad") {
And then replace 'place' with i:
var emailAddress = data2[i];
It should work as expected now.
I require a separate object which contains the related fields of a child object.
Currently I do it like this:
Opportunity opp = [SELECT Id, Name, Account.Id, Account.Name FROM Opportunity LIMIT 1];
Account acc = new Account(
Id = opp.Account.Id,
Name = opp.Account.Name
);
When working with a large related object I have to initialise many more fields than this and the script becomes very large and ugly.
What is the quickest way to initialise the related field data into a separate object?
You must define the all fields in your SOQL query (mor info here).
But it is not necessary if you want to clone the object:
Opportunity opp = [SELECT Account.Id, Account.Name
FROM Opportunity
LIMIT 1];
Account acc = opp.Account;
Example with Custom Object:
Contract__c c = [ Select Account__r.FirstName
From Contract__c
Where Account__r.FirstName != null
Limit 1];
Account a = c.Account__r;