I have a object where the child relationship name is


instead of something more descriptive. How did that happen? Could it have been because the developer was working in Eclipse or via some UI?

Note: this instance has been around for a while. This object was created in 2009 by consultants so we don't have access to the person/people who created the object.


Once upon a time, the Child Relationship Name was an optional field. If you didn't put a value in, Salesforce chose a default value for you (I'm pretty sure it's the field's ID preceded by an R). Eventually they made this value mandatory, and is also required when using migration tools (e.g. tested in the Force.com IDE).

| improve this answer | |
  • We may not ever know for certain, but this answer seems highly probably. – Jagular Jul 13 '15 at 15:32
  • In this instance, the Child Relationship Name is not the field ID prefixed with "R". It might be so elsewhere. – Jagular Jul 14 '15 at 16:54
  • @Jagular Interesting. See 00N is the "field ID prefix", "R0" I'm assuming is the pod identifier, "00000Q8ee" is the unique record ID, and "MAC" are the parity bits. It should match some valid field somewhere. If this is in a managed package, it would represent the original field's ID. – sfdcfox Jul 14 '15 at 16:59
  • Or, thinking about it, could have also been made by another org then migrated using a package or migration tools. – sfdcfox Jul 14 '15 at 17:15
  • Even stripping off the prefix etc, I'm not seeing it. Here's the field ID - "00N00000008igW3". My guess would be that it is made in another org and migrated via migration tools. I've seen nothing that tells me that the object or the field were part of a package. – Jagular Jul 14 '15 at 19:52

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.