module function · N/query
runSuiteQL()
query.runSuiteQL(options)
Runs an arbitrary SuiteQL query.
- Implementation
- Not started
- Design
- Open for proposals suggest how it should read
A
suitescript api
1query.runSuiteQL({2 query: /* string, required */,3 params: /* <string | number | >, optional */,4 customScriptId: /* string, optional */5});| Parameter | Type | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| options.query | string | required | The string representation of the SuiteQL query to run. |
| options.params | <string | number | > | optional | The parameters to use in the SuiteQL query. |
| options.customScriptId | string | optional | A unique identifier used for potential performance issues in a query. If your query produces performance issues, the custom script ID identifies where the update will need to occur. This ID can also be used as a precaution to speed up performance fixes, if necessary. Note: The Script ID must be unique or the performance enhancements will affect each query with the same customScriptID. |
B
mynt syntax
No Mynt syntax yet.
Nothing in the language compiles to query.runSuiteQL(options) today. How should it read?
C
community proposals
Competing syntax for runSuiteQL, from GitHub Discussions. Select two or more to compare them side by side.
Loading proposals from GitHub…
D
suggest an alternative
Write the Mynt you wish you could write.
A good proposal shows the syntax, the SuiteScript it should become, and argues for it: why it is clearer, how it fits the rest of the language, what it makes harder.
- Clarity. Does it say what happens, without ceremony?
- Consistency. Does it read like
load,saveandRef[field]? - Expressiveness. Does it cover the cases people actually write?
- Honesty. Does it hide a NetSuite cost, such as governance, that a reader should see?