Salesforce to Salesforce Connection Sent Fields Not Working
When displaying the ConnectionSentId fields for an object the fields are blank. Creating a table using the object PartnerNetworkConnection works fine but those same Ids should also be available on the shared records.
Seems to be same issue for an object whether I try PartnerNetworkRecordConnection or the parent PNC.
Seems to be same issue for an object whether I try PartnerNetworkRecordConnection or the parent PNC.
Tagged:
1
Categories
- 7.9K Questions
- 926 Ideas
- 220 Discussion Categories
- 178 General
- 9 Community Feedback
- 3 Community Info
- 18 Knowledge Base
Comments
If I just setup a basic model and include both the ConnectionSentId and the ConnectionSent.ConnectionName and run that, both of these fields are blank even on shared records.
I understand it's difficult to test since you have to have a shared connection setup but just looks like that those fields aren't pulling in anything
1. Drag in a Template / add a Template field
2. For the template body, put this: {{{ConnectionSentId}}} ({{{ConnectionSent.ConnectionName}}})
I just want to check whether this is an issue of data not being provided by Salesforce or whether it's a UI-level rendering issue.
Also, you did have parentheses in the template body you sent me and, in case that wasn't an accident for some reason, I tried with and without those.
The only caveat to the above is the special Salesforce "Connection User" which is who creates the connections. That really shouldn't matter but there are quirky things with these objects so I'm not completely surprised at this problem.
Also, we are just previewing the page in Skuid, the actual object is using the SFDC page layout and I (System Admin) can see the ConnectionSent info there fine so we know the permissions are ok.
It looks like one of the items missing is the Local Record Id for the PartnerNetworkRecordConnection object. I just created a table on that and the Id and Status populate but not the LocalRecordId or PartnerNetworkConnectionId. Obviously without those fields it cannot make the association correctly. I guess we'll keep playing with it then to see if any workarounds. Thanks, Darrell