WhereFieldEvaluator too permissive on updates #95
Comments
jamessimone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 6, 2021
jamessimone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 7, 2021
jamessimone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 11, 2021
) * Fixes #95 by fixing restrictiveness level for RollupEvaluator * Tweaks for #88 to fully support automated pipeline * Further fixes for #95 after getting feedback from Katherine on beta package version * Fixing README typo * Updating batch method to properly intake RollupInvocationPoint * Fix apex issue where not all code paths were setting CalcItem__c on Rollup__mdt synthetic records * Add baseline logging * Add more logging areas * Removing current branch from package:version:create invocation, as that royally borks the format of the package version Id in sfdx-project.json * Added even better logging for invocables * First take on addendum for v1.2.17, patching holes in current RollupCalculator functionality for full recalculation routes that weren't already covered (so, everything besides average/first/last) * Added baseBaseCalculation method in RollupCalculator to deal with the possibility of rollups where the evaluator filters out all calc items necessitating a full recalc - which would not have happened for String and Number-based rollups previously * Fixes #97 by properly handling unwriteable fields in recursive check * added safe guards when migrating from DLRS (#98) * Pretty-ing up contribution to scripts/convert-dlrs-rules.apex
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Reported by Katherine West - this is an oversight on my part specifically related to the rollup operations that are always full recalculations - like FIRST/LAST/AVERAGE. As part of #80, I made a change that allowed, for updates, calculation items to make it through to the async rollup part even if they were excluded as part of the
Calc Item Where Clause.What really needs to happen is for them to allow a rollup to be kicked off, but to still be excluded during the rollup calculation itself.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: