Salesforce Node Missing RecordTypeId

Feature Requests
1

Salesforce looks to be missing the standard field RecordTypeId which is present in most of the Objects. Can we have this added to the Node?

2

I just changed this post to a feature request. Make sure you upvote it. Is the record type id suppose to be a select?

For later reference:

3

This isn’t a nice to have feature, it’s missing from the core functionality. All objects need to have all Salesforce standard fields present, this one (and possibly others) is missing.

Record type doesn’t need to be a lookup, but it does need to be a standard field that can be set within the Node. RecordTypeId is a reference that is set by using a SF record ID. There are custom values that can be set, but being able to update this on creation is important.

4

What are the other fields that you know of that are also missing? So, we can add them all at once.

5

I’ll have a look tomorrow at a few orgs I am connected to and see if I can suggest a path forward on this

6

So I took a look at this and the standard fields listed in n8n is complete based on the single record type list. Most orgs use multiple record types, which exposes the standard RecordType and RecordTypeId fields for a number of Objects.

The full list of Objects that use Record Type can be found here… Salesforce Developers

These are the Objects (resources present in n8n) that have a RecordTypeId field that should be able to be set via the REST API:

  • Account
  • Case
  • Contact
  • Lead
  • Custom Objects

This can be passed in one of two ways (from what I can tell):

“RecordType”: {
“Name”: “TEST Record Type”
}

OR

“RecordTypeId”: “012280000019WDg”

One reference… DeveloperForce

I have a workaround in Salesforce that will work for the time being, so this is less of a priority for me. This is an important function of more developed Salesforce Orgs with slightly more complex record logic and design.

7

Got added. We will let you know when it’s released.

1 Like
8

Thanks for the help!

9

Of course. Thanks for sharing the missing but quite important parameter. We rely on our community members for this kind of stuff since (most of the time) we do not have the domain knowledge of the tools we create nodes for.