Architects

Hello All,

We know that Salesforce creates share objects when we set the OWD to Private or Public Read Only. When there is a huge volume of records, does the system perform faster when a user tries to search for a record or try to run a report if the OWD of the object is Public Read Only and slower when it is Private?

If the OWD were Private and I create one sharing rule to provide ReadWrite access to a group, there will be two entries in the share table - one for the record owner and one for the group with ReadWrite access. 

If the OWD were Public Read Only and I create one sharing rule to provide ReadWrite access to a group, there will still be only two entries in the share table -  one for the record owner and one for the group with ReadWrite access. 

So, does it mean the performance will be same for Private OWD & Public Read Only and the it makes a difference only when we switch to Public Read Write OWD? 

This is the reference documentation on record sharing under the hood and it only gives the example of Private OWD but does not talk about performance - https://developer.salesforce.com/docs/atlas.en-us.salesforce_record_access_under_the_hood.meta/salesforce_record_access_under_the_hood/uth_entity.htm

@Architects  @Data Architects  @* Salesforce Platform *

Thank you in advance and apologies for the long question.

Some example:

To access the data for all accounts from external system, that match would be:

https://cxz.my.salesforce.com/services/data/v59.0/query/q?=SELECT +Company_Mailing_City__c+ Name + FROM +Account

By directly passing an SoQL query into the url.

whenever the internal salesforce API would changes(specially the version number) then it would be dependent from the SF internal data model.

The alternative would be to directly implement this query into the SF instance and offer an extra endpoint that can be used to query it.

We would need a more specific endpoint in the ''/Account' API that provides us with the following Data in a JSON Format.

The bold values in brackets represent the Salesforce internal field naming, while the first represents the naming we would like to have them mapped to.

Company:**Account** {

string name (**Name**)

string city (**Company_Mailing_City__c**)

string country (**Company_Mailing_Country__c**)

}

Can anyone help like how can we  directly implement the above mentioned query into the SF instance and offer an extra endpoint that can be used to query it.

I'm somewhat new to the Salesforce space having switched architectural roles for a financial services company.  I'm currently working on a piece of work looking into the design principles that we should use when designing our solutions.  

My thinking is that there maybe design principles per cloud for example we have Core CRM, FSC, Marketing Cloud, CDP, Datarama and Experience Cloud to name a few.  I think the principles could span Technology, Application, Customisation, Data, Integration, Security, Mobile etc.

I've found and used the following links that have started to form the basis of design principles.  I've attached a rough copy of the principles.  I think they will require consolidation and rework to fit our organisational structure. 

http://ivanesalmeida.blogspot.com/2018/08/architecture-principles-for-salesforce.html

https://www.salesforce.com/video/7810553/

Are there other considerations or resources you would recommend?

At a lower level, I' have already defined and agreed AppExchange design principles.  

Thanks in advance

#Salesforce #AwesomeAdmins #Trailblazers #Salesforce Architect #Architect #Architects