why do you feel this is not the intended - or even desired - behavior? I'd hate to have to omit childless parents every time I wanted to REPLACE the child values.
It may be indeed desirable, but IMHO dont think it was intended ( although I may be completely wrong in my assumption ). If one wanted to replace the child records and not omit the parents, then why not use a relationship that doesnt have 'Allow creation' on? One would get the same net result. I would expect it to create a child record when this option is on, but then again that is just my 2 cents. ;)
Thank you for your posts.
Although I totally understand what you are attempting to accomplish, "Replace Field Contents" will only replace information for already committed records. Although "Allow Creation" of portal records is checked/turned on, no record is yet created/committed. The example provided by "comment" is one possible negative outcome. Therefore, I'm fairly certain this is working as intended.
Even with that said, I have forwarded your information to our Development and Software Quality Assurance (Testing) departments for review.
I'm fairly certain I will be told this is working as intended, so I would encourage you to enter this information into the Feature Suggestion web form at:
Our Development and Product Management departments read the entries from this web form, and they will review and consider if a design change is needed.
I fully understand that may be the case. A clarification would be great.
tsgal said, "Although "Allow Creation" of portal records is checked/turned on, no record is yet created/committed. "
It has nothing to do with portal records, Allow Creation works whether portal or field on layout. If you type directly into child field from parent or you use Set Field, the results are the same, ie, a child record is created if none exists (with allow creation on). I agree with Mr. Vodka that it should create child records if allow creation is on for that relationship.
Someone shouldn't be on a layout based upon a relationship with Allow Creation on, with child fields displayed and enterable, without expecting possibility of creating child records if data is entered into a child field. Replace Field Contents not responding in the same way is unexpected and incorrect behavior and that is the point. That is my opinion. :smileyhappy:
Although I do see the logic of the opposing view, I still think that Replace Field Contents should not function as some kind of Set Multiple Fields step.
In practical terms, I believe that a scenario where one would want to replace child values without creating new records is much more common than the one that calls for creating child records for childless parents in the process (in fact, I am having a hard time imagining a situation where I would want this to happen).
The way it is implemented now, there is extra work for those that for some reason do find themselves in the second scenario. If it were changed, there would be extra work for everyone that imports data from outside sources, for example. Yes, I could define another relationship that does not allow creation - but why should I, when I already have one that serves me well for both purposes?
Now that makes sense also. Never mind me then. :smileyvery-happy: