MS CRM Save + Copy as new (Custom Entity) - dynamics-crm

I have a custom entity in Microsoft CRM (4.0). The user has to input records however usually they have a batch of 20+ records that are almost the same apart from 2 or 3 fields which need changing. I know I need to write some custom code to enable this functionally. However can anyone recommend any methods to do this.
Ideally there should be a button that will save and create a copy as a new entity.
My Current way of thinking is to pass all the details as part of the URL and use javascript to strip them out on the page load event. Any ideas welcome.
Thanks
Luke

I found the answer here:
http://mscrm4ever.blogspot.com/2008/06/cloning-entity-using-javascript.html
I've used it and it appears to work well.

Since there are numerous fields, but only certain fields values are different, then i am thinking to set the default value to all the fields, so that users just need to alter those values when needed.
In my approach, i will hook a javascript function on load of the form data entry screen and use XmlHttp approach/Ajax approach to hook to the custom web service to pull/retrieve the default values of each fields. Or you can set those values at the javascript function itself, but the drawback of this, it's difficult to customize later. So i will choose the approach to hook to the custom web service and retrieve those value from some application parameter entity.
Your idea of providing a "clone" button is also a great idea, which means that it will duplicate all the attributes of the previous record, into a new record, so that it will save time for data entry person to customize the different value
EDIT
Since you would enter records in batch mode, how about customizing .ASPX screen to enter records. By customizing through .ASPX screen, you can use a tab , so that users can browse through tabs, to customize the value/attribute of each record.
There will be a "save" button as well as "clone" button to clone some common attribute or value.

I would create a custom web service that would accept the entity type and the ID of the record I'm cloning. Your "Save and Clone" button would call the service, and the service would handle the details of retrieving the current record and deciding which fields to set on the new record. The service creates the record, and sends the Guid of the record back to your button, which then opens up the newly created record.
This way, you avoid the messiness of setting/getting values in JavaScript and tying which fields to set/retrieve directly to your OnLoads, as well as avoiding the possibility of query string that's too long.
The service could easily be sufficiently generalized so that all you'd have to do is add your button to any entity, and it would work, assuming you'd set up your service to handle that particular entity.
One possible downside is that since the clone record button would actually create the record, the user would be forced to delete the cloned record if they decided they didn't want to clone the record after all.

Related

Adding multiple entities to one main form

I am in the process of modifying forms to account for V9 of Dynamics which is being rolled out currently.
Our environment is using Dialogs but these are being deprecated with V9 which means we have to prepare the forms to be used instead of these Dialogs.
Due to how fragmented our solution is the data is all over the place in different entities and can all be written too at different times.
Is it possible to have multiple entities/records on the same form which are all editable? This way I can run rules to hide and show as people edit specific fields.
From what I can identify, there is no "true" way to achieve this. However, if there are entities which are linked via a relationship within the solution, it is possible to add the "Party List" type field to the form and this will act as the link between the two entities. When you go to search for an existing record within the related entity, there is a new button which allows you too create a new record of that entity which directly associated with the form you were working on initially.
We do have editable subgrids. Add the subgrids of related entities & allow users to edit the related records in main record form at one shot.

How to prevent two users to edit one row from DB

i am using Spring/Hibernate/ZK. In one tab i get object from DB for editing by user, but second user can open the same tab and the same object for editing . I want to informed second user whit message like "This object is аlready open" and hide buttons for save.Тhus second user can see current data from DB to this object but can`t edint him.Is there a way to check session for this object or another way to do that.
The other answers mostly look at the database, but if all users use the same zk application to access the database, you could keep track of opened objects in the Composer or ViewModel (depending whether you use MVC or MVVM; I'll just call it controller).
Your controller would need a static list of objects that are currently modified. If a user requests to open an object that is not in the list, everything is fine and your controller enables the fields and save button. Otherwise, those are disabled and/or you display a message.
The tricky part is clearing objects from that list. If a user presses the save button, you just remove the object from the list. But what if the user doesn't and just closes the tab or their session just times out? In this case you need a callback, or a mechanism that regularly checks whether the screen is still open.
You could achieve this by adding a zk timer to the tab that pings every now and then and updates the timestamp in your static list (so make it a map). If a new user tries to edit the object, check how old the last timestamp is. If it is old enough (i.e. the previous user saved it or abandoned the screen), allow them to edit it.
Still, you have to think about what to do if a user just keeps the screen open. How long are they allowed to keep the lock on the object? This is an issue in Microsoft Office as well. If multiple users try to open an Excel file from a network location, the first one gets to lock and the others cannot save until that user saves.
You may have additional field which indicates that column is being edited. When first user starts work, the field would be updated. The second user would query object with 'on hold' status and your code would handle this.
Other way - use Hibernate #Version field in your entity. It holds object version which is incremented after every update operation. If second user would save object after first one already saved, it would throw OptimisticLockException which you could handle in your code. More about optimistic and pesimistic locking: Chapter 5. Locking. Related discussions: Hibernate Automatic Versioning and When to use #Version and #Audited in Hibernate?
The best solution is to use Optimistic Concurrency Control with Versioning and when Hibernate throws Concurrency Update issue due to same row is being updated in two transaction then use one of below strategy
First Wins Strategy
Last Wins Strategy
Merge Conflicting Update Strategy
First Wins Strategy is not good solution as it leads to lost update and user will get frustrated that all his work is lost.
By Last Wins Strategy one of user will get error message that you are working on Stale data and start your transaction again . By this way also user can get frustrated due to fact that now again he need to restart operation from beginning but his changes will not lost.
Instead go with Merge conflicting Update Strategy, when Hibernate throws Stale object exception reload screen with new data and user will see updated result and allow him to proceed with latest data. In this user changes will not loss and user will not get error message , just his screen reloads with fresh data and he can decide whether to proceed or not .
You can take example any e-commerce site and you will get one of result of either Last Wins Strategy or Merge Conflicting Update Strategy. Two user can start to by one item but one of user will get message in last screen that item is not stock.

Check if Associated View is blank in Dynamic CRM Online

In CRM Online on a customer form is there anyway that you can check if the Associated View for Assets is blank? And if its blank change a field value based on it.
Using JavaScript, 2 ways:
The associated grid is showing records related to your primary record. You can perform the same query the grid is doing using REST which will tell you if there are any records. You can then count the records, and change the field value as required. This approach is better if there are records in the database but which aren't shown in the view for some reason, e.g. view filters.
Access the Grid objects data using getRows(). As above you can then count the records, and change the field value as required. The downside of this is I believe those methods only give you access to the records shown on the form (and not any hidden by filters but still in the database) - but I don't think that that will be a problem here.
Worth bearing in mind that this approach only works client side, e.g. someone has to be actually looking at the form.
If you need to cover the a non-client side approach, e.g. workflows creating records, then you should probably look at plugin development so the changes can be performed server side.
As a side if you just want a simple count shown on form you then you should probably look at Calculated Fields and in particular Rollup fields. You might also be able to run further client side JavaScript from the count.

MVC3 - what is the best practice to validate the old data and new data when submitting a form

I am using mvc3 for my web app.
When an user edit an existing form, make a few changes and save it.
what is the best practice to check which field in the form has been modified.
Regards,
Bubblegum.
Since we're not talking data access - upon postback, compare it to your object in your database. This is somewhat of an open question because it depends what data access you are using and what models you are using. Entity framework Entities can track their modified state so you may be able to use
TryUpdateModel(yourInstanceLoadedFromYourDatabase)
and check the status of each field. That 'may' work, otherwise you are comparing each field. However why do you need to know specifically which field changed? Save the entire object back to the database (or simply merge with the values from the page using the same TryUpdateModel above)

MS CRM 4 - Custom entity with "regardingobjectid" functionality

I've made a custom entity that will work as an data modification audit (any entity modified will trigger creating an instance of this entity). So far I have the plugin working fine (tracking old and new versions of properties changed).
I'd like to also keep track of what entity this is related to. At first I added a N:1 from DataHistory to Task (eg.) and I can indeed link back to the original task (via a "new_tasksid" attribute I added to DataHistory).
The problem is every entity I want to log will need a separate attribute id (and an additional entry in the form!)
Looking at how phone, task, etc utilize a "regardingobjectid", this is what I should do. Unfortunately, when I try to add a "dataobjectid" and map it to eg Task and PhoneCall, it complains (on the second save), that the reference needs to be unique. How does the CRM get around this and can I emulate it?
You could create your generic "dataobjectid" field, but make it a text field and store the guid of the object there. You would lose the native grids for looking at the audit records, and you wouldn't be able to join these entities through advanced find, fetch or query expressions, but if that's not important, then you can whip up an ASPX page that displays the audit logs for that record in whatever format you choose and avoid making new relationships for every entity you want to audit.
CRM has a special lookup type that can lookup to many entity types. That functionality isn't available to us customizers, unfortunately. Your best bet is to add each relationship that could be regarding and hide the lookups that aren't in use for this particular entity.

Resources