Skip to main content
Nintex Community Menu Bar

I am querying the LoginHistory object in Salesforce to show logins per day. I need to limit it to logins to the Salesforce UI vs via third party tools. I believe I can do this by having the following condition on the model:


Application = ‘Browser’


However, when I add this condition, I am still seeing values that I am trying to exclude. I use a basic model to see the actual data and I can see data in all of the fields I am trying to use in my conditions.


Any thoughts as to why this criteria is being ignored?

It’s possible the Salesforce API does not allow you to quietly based on that criteria. You might be able to us “having” by hacking the xml of your skuid page. This applies filter criteria after the query.


Anyone have an example of a having statement? Looks like all the old posts about it have been deleted from the community.


I tried switching the condition location to be “Client” for that one condition (on the off chance that that would do what you describe as well) but sadly it did not. Instead it brings up no results when I do that. 😕 SALESFORCE!!


When this sort of strange behavior appears - I always look at the core Salesforce API documentation to see what they allow SOQL to do. Look here.


The “Application field” in the login history table has properties “Group, Nillable, Sort” it does not allow “Filter”. So this is why the condition does not work .


The Login Type field does allow filtering - might it be a viable alternative?


The Client side filter retrieves whatever you have in your model limit, and then filters those records. IF you have the model limit set to 20, and there are no “Browser application logins” you won’t get any records in your list - even if there are valid records on the server. You could bring in as many login history records as the Apex Heap Size will allow - and then use client side filtering. But that seems expensive.


Good luck…


These are both really helpful pieces of information - both for now and the future. Thank you so much. I’ll see what might work. (Fingers crossed)


Reply