• Mikhail Nitko
  • NEWBIE
  • 15 Points
  • Member since 2014

  • Chatter
    Feed
  • 0
    Best Answers
  • 0
    Likes Received
  • 0
    Likes Given
  • 2
    Questions
  • 3
    Replies

Hi folks, I need your help.

I'm trying to create a Workflow that triggers when creating a Child object record that is tied to a Parent, which has a lookup to another object via that contains the decisive picklist field.

My real objects are complicated, by a similar hypothetical situation would be:...

Lets pretend I have a Student__c parent object, and the Student has child object records called Classes, and the Student also connected via lookup to a School object.  The School object has a Picklist on it, called Region.  The Classes object also has a picklist on it called Region.

I would like to have a workflow that fires when you create a Classes child record, that checks if the value of Region on the School object is set to a specific value, and then set that value in it's own Region picklist based on that.

I have tried workflow formulas that execute on criteria such as:

CONTAINS(TEXT(Student__r.School__r.Region__c),"West")

ISPICKVAL(Student__r.School__r.Region__c,"West")

TEXT(Student__r.School__r.Region__c) = "West"

I've trued using single or double quotes around the values.

And I've even brought the field from "School" onto "Student" via a formula field, already converted into TEXT(), so that I can try all those above formulas without the intermediate object in the formula, so it looked like:  Student__r.School_Region__c = "West"

And I just cant get the workflow to fire.

Any ideas?

Hi All,

I'm new to the org I've inherited, and am running into a challenge that was precipitated by a small request.

We have a multi-picklist field that I'm changing to a single picklist field.  

Since that picklist field appears in a class (that is no longer used), I got the Force.com IDE, and made a sandbox, and comment out the no longer used class in the IDE, then deployed to sandbox.

While deploying the change set from the sandbox to production, I hit a handful of errors, all citing components that I did not touch, nor ever worked on.  I'm looking at them now and I would be a bit over my head to try and fix someone else's work here.

So how do I deploy only the single class which I need to modify to change a single field?

This was supposed to be a simple request, but the rabbit hole keeps getting deeper.......

Hi All,

I'm new to the org I've inherited, and am running into a challenge that was precipitated by a small request.

We have a multi-picklist field that I'm changing to a single picklist field.  

Since that picklist field appears in a class (that is no longer used), I got the Force.com IDE, and made a sandbox, and comment out the no longer used class in the IDE, then deployed to sandbox.

While deploying the change set from the sandbox to production, I hit a handful of errors, all citing components that I did not touch, nor ever worked on.  I'm looking at them now and I would be a bit over my head to try and fix someone else's work here.

So how do I deploy only the single class which I need to modify to change a single field?

This was supposed to be a simple request, but the rabbit hole keeps getting deeper.......

I've got a custom object with number fields on it. I want to be able to report on evaluations entered into that object and those fields using an average formula. I've made it that far, but I need it to not make blank values count against the average. For instance, if I want an average of one field from that object, 1stField__C may have a total value of 25. The average of that from 5 evaluations would be 5. But in that same report, I want to average 2ndField__C. It may have one blank value, and total to 20. If it is diving the record count into that (5 records), it's 4, but one is blank. It should be diving the number of values that do not equal blank into the total (20 divided by 4, not 5) and then it would give an average of 5. Not 4.

 

I know that is a run on like crazy, but any help would be appreciated. Thanks!