http://forums.visokio.com/discussions/tagged/saleforce/feed.rss Mon, 30 Oct 17 14:40:35 -0400 Tagged with saleforce - Visokio Forums en-CA http://forums.visokio.com/discussion/3213/salesforce-data-edit-get-batch-results Tue, 07 Feb 2017 13:35:42 -0500 EricStewart 3213@/discussions
Salesforce open API for getting results back:
https://developer.salesforce.com/docs/atlas.en-us.api_asynch.meta/api_asynch/asynch_api_batches_get_results.htm]]> http://forums.visokio.com/discussion/3162/salesforce-output-doesnt-pass-name-field-to-custom-objects Fri, 05 Aug 2016 12:40:15 -0400 ricovas 3162@/discussions So... Salesforce Output has 3 options, Append/Replace/Update. Append is the desired option here, to create new records. Funny thing is Append seems to deliberately drop the 'name' field when passing the bulk insert job. It will be included in an Update call. The result is the newly created records will have the SF default name (which is the ID of the record). Updating those records with the same Omniscope output will pass the name value without issue. And ouputting Omniscope to a file and dataloading that file through another system passes the name, so it's nothing with the format or validation.

Looking at what's being passed it's clear that the name is simply not included, which is why I say deliberately. Creating Standard SF object record (account,opportunity) DOES pass the name value in an Append style output.

Attachment showing that for creating of new record in Append (insert) call, the Name field is dropped. But in an Update call it is passed.

Omniscope 2.9-rc[Plus] b1830 (May 19, 2016 10:20:00 PM)
Build revision:
2ba7ec00c44c
Windows 7 6.1 amd64
Java:
Oracle Corporation 1.8.0_45 arch=64]]>