Finding out what properties were changed


Is it possible (such as through a Code Studio event action) to find out what properties were changed when a record is modified?

Hi James,

Currently you are able to access a property’s historical information via the Field History widget. There is also a setting within display-only fragments (e.g. fragments in an information widget) where you can enable the history (The setting is called ‘Show field history’)

However, there is currently no support for capturing a record’s historical data within Code Studio. I would suggest raising an Idea in the Community for this, so we can consider it for a future release.

Thanks for the info Ali, I’ll add it to the Ideas list!

It was to help show a timeline of case events including sent messages and actions on related objects so the field history or events widget is not appropriate in this case. The workaround for the moment is a composite and a Fields changed rule per property to copy the composite into a timeline object which does the job (just more time consuming to setup when there are a lot of properties).

Hi James,
Not sure if this would be helpful but I create a history of objects by creating a one to many relationship to a copy of the object then when the object is changed use copy field value(s) of the ones you want to search. As it’s a one to many relationship it creates a new instance. You can keep a count as well on the main object and copy this over to give you the change order.

Fantastic suggestion @robinli :slight_smile:

I do a very similar thing whereby I have an ‘Activity’ object that does exactly as you stated, with the additional inclusion of text property in the activity object, where I can specify a fixed text to communicate the action taken (e.g. Updated address line 1, Changed the case owner, etc)

This effectively is an object-record oriented way of managing your historical data and/or activities against a record.

Although this isn’t something you can do in Code Studio yet, at least this is an option that can be considered whether it fits in @james.coleman build.