10

I ran into this while writing unit tests for my org but I simplified it in a developer account to make sure it would happen there.

I have custom object Thing__c. The Name field is autonumber. I wrote the following unit test:

static testMethod void myUnitTest() {
    List<Thing__c> things = new List<Thing__c> {
        new Thing__c(), new Thing__c(), new Thing__c()
    };        
    insert things;
    List<Thing__c> queriedThings = [select name from Thing__c];
    for (Thing__c thing : queriedThings) {
        system.debug('+++ ' + thing.Name);
    }
}

And the relevant log lines are as follows:

+++ C-100000

+++ C-100001

+++ C-100002

So then I add a @testSetup method, and my test class looks in full like this:

@isTest
private class ThingTest {
    @testSetup()
    static void setup() {
        List<Thing__c> things = new List<Thing__c> {
            new Thing__c(), new Thing__c(), new Thing__c()
        };        
        insert things;
    }
    
    static testMethod void myUnitTest() {
        List<Thing__c> things = new List<Thing__c> {
            new Thing__c(), new Thing__c(), new Thing__c()
        };        
        insert things;
        List<Thing__c> queriedThings = [select name from Thing__c];
        for (Thing__c thing : queriedThings) {
            system.debug('+++ ' + thing.Name);
        }
    }
}

This inserts 6 Things__c records, so they should be named from C-000000 to C-000005, but they're not. Numbering restarts where it started when creating the first record in the @testSetup method. Log shows:

"Name":"C-100000","Id":"a0236000002FskaAAC"

"Name":"C-100001","Id":"a0236000002FskbAAC"

"Name":"C-100002","Id":"a0236000002FskcAAC"

"Name":"C-100000","Id":"a0236000002FskdAAC"

"Name":"C-100001","Id":"a0236000002FskeAAC"

"Name":"C-100002","Id":"a0236000002FskfAAC"

If you don't want the repeated numbers then create it all in the test method and use no testSetup annotation. Just call the method manually in each test method. But this, for me, renders @testSetup not very useful.

Why does this happen? Is this a bug or intended behavior? Is there a way I can use @testSetup and have autonumbering work as I expect it to?

5
  • Interesting. Seems like a bug. Is this related to salesforce.stackexchange.com/questions/119272/…?
    – Adrian Larson
    Commented Apr 26, 2016 at 16:01
  • @AdrianLarson it is indeed Adrian. I answered there and thought it would be better to have a more specific question with all the needed info. In that question I didn't mention I was using testSetup. Didn't think it had anything to do. Commented Apr 26, 2016 at 16:04
  • Yeah this makes it much more interesting. Probably should delete that other question since this one will provide any answers that could have and it didn't have enough information to begin with (as we now know).
    – Adrian Larson
    Commented Apr 26, 2016 at 16:06
  • 1
    Do you have the Independent Auto-Number Sequence Test Option turned on?
    – Adrian Larson
    Commented Apr 26, 2016 at 16:07
  • @AdrianLarson Disabled it and works as I expected. But still, shouldn't it work with or without the setting? Commented Apr 26, 2016 at 16:14

1 Answer 1

6

My hunch is that when you enable Independent Auto-Number Sequence Test Option, the auto number sequence gets reset for every transaction. Since @testSetup runs in a different context, it should be a separate transaction from the unit test. Hence, the unit test itself gets a fresh sequence.

3
  • Do you still think it sounds like a bug? Because one of the benefits of a \@testSetup method is not having to repeatedly call it and suppose a preset environment before every test. So this issue forces me to either use independent numbering for tests or use \@testSetup. Shouldn't I be able to have both? Commented Apr 26, 2016 at 16:39
  • @PedroOtero No, on second thought this seems to be WAD (working as designed).
    – Adrian Larson
    Commented Apr 26, 2016 at 16:53
  • @PedroOtero As for the conflict, you are just going to have to set up all your data in @testSetup if you want to use it.
    – Adrian Larson
    Commented Apr 26, 2016 at 17:11

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .