hi, I have a map reduce script, in getInputData i have this

const orSearch = search.load({ id: 'customsearch_ps_emptybrand' });
        const inputData = [];
        let rows = orSearch.run().getRange(0, 1);
        log.debug('rows', rows);
        for (let i in rows) {
            const internalid = rows[i].getValue({ name: 'internalid', summary: 'GROUP' });
            inputData.push({ internalid });
        }
        log.debug('inputData', inputData);
        return inputData;

If i run the saved search from Netsuite UI, i can see 15 results, but in the map reduce above,

rows

and

inputData

are showing empty array I can confirm that the saved search that i'm using in the script and the one i run in UI is the same. Any idea what am i missing here ?

This probably isn't too helpful, but I don't see anything wrong with your code, and testing the exact same code in my account in the console works as expected. It shouldn't behave any differently in a Map/Reduce, either, so I don't think that's it. FWIW

for..in

is not advised for iterating over Arrays.

for..of

,

forEach

, and other iterators like

map

are preferred.

hi thanks for replying and testing on your side eric

Maybe, if it's a Private Search?

could it be the same thing for this ?

Have you tried a different search?

hmm not yet, yup maybe i should do try that

Check for errors. Try/catch log the error

The M/R is likely swallowing any errors and shoving them down to

summarize

. A

try..catch

like Lee suggests might help you surface the error

thanks lee and eric, i just removed the old saved search, and create a new one, exactly the same

Why wouldn't you just return the search in the getInputData stage and let the Map/Reduce script handle the values?

function getInputData() {
            const search = nsSearch.load({
                id:'customsearch_ps_emptybrand'
            });

            return search;
        }

or even better, return an object literal indicating which search to run

Not sure we have nearly enough context to prescribe "better" approaches here.

well, I maintain that returning the object literal is objectively 'better' than the code prior which just loads and returns a search object.

I agree on that, but in regards to the OP, we're just guessing

Maybe pass the search as a parameter.

Thanks Shawn, you're right, normally i will return the search object, but for my case i need to return paginated result, i don't want the whole data to be processed at once, because the saved search contains a lot of records and we have concern that this MR will take too long to run and blocking other MR / scheduled script.