New Fields Not Appearing in Mapping Options After NS Saved Search Updates

Integrator.io
,
1

I'm working on a NetSuite to SQL Server integration in Celigo and running into a field mapping issue. I've added new vendor fields to my NetSuite saved search, but they're not showing up as available mapping options in the final import step, even though the data appears to be flowing through earlier steps.

What I've Tried:

  1. Added Vendor Internal ID and Vendor Name columns to my NetSuite saved search
  2. Verified the saved search returns the expected data when run directly in NetSuite
  3. Created custom field "Integration Vendor" on the Item record as a test - this field shows in Export preview but still doesn't appear in Celigo mapping options

Current Behavior:

Technical Details:

  • Integration flow: NetSuite Saved Search → SQL Import
  • NetSuite saved search includes vendor joins
  • Target: SQL Server database table

Question:

Why might fields appear in NS Export Preview but not in SQL Import mapping options?

Any guidance on troubleshooting field mapping issues in Celigo would be greatly appreciated!

2

It’s a caching issue and isn’t specific to just NetSuite as a source. If you update something on your export, like the name, then save and change it back, then you should be good. Also, make sure you don’t have stale data in your mock output on the export.

3

Unfortunately that didn't do the trick, what I didn't mention but I think is relevant is that I have an intermediate step truncating my MSFT SQL table in order to ensure we're working with a clean, complete dataset. At this point I still don't have the fields that I can see in the export preview available.

This image depicts a workflow sequence for exporting, truncating, and importing inventory item data using NetSuite and SQL, with each step marked as successful. (Captioned by AI)
This image depicts a workflow sequence for exporting, truncating, and importing inventory item data using NetSuite and SQL, with each step marked as successful. (Captioned by AI)1182×220 12.1 KB

The image shows an SQL query to truncate a table alongside a JSON object detailing inventory records. (Captioned by AI)
The image shows an SQL query to truncate a table alongside a JSON object detailing inventory records. (Captioned by AI)1226×397 48.3 KB

For instance my custom field I made "Integration Vendor." That is available in the export preview but not as a field for mapping.

4

Can you show what you have in you mock output on your NetSuite export?

5

The image shows JSON data representing an inventory item with details such as ID, name, pricing, and account information. (Captioned by AI)
The image shows JSON data representing an inventory item with details such as ID, name, pricing, and account information. (Captioned by AI)836×668 59.8 KB

The highlighted values are the fields I'm after but they're currently nested and are not accessible individually within my import.

6

That's the preview data, can you check your mock output?

The image shows a user interface for configuring an API data export, including settings for HTTP requests, output types, and mock data setup, with a focus on JSON response format. (Captioned by AI)
The image shows a user interface for configuring an API data export, including settings for HTTP requests, output types, and mock data setup, with a focus on JSON response format. (Captioned by AI)2560×1277 219 KB

7

The image displays a JSON structure detailing an inventory item, specifically a "DRAXIMAGE SESTAMIBI KIT US (10 vials)," with various attributes including internal ID, vendor information, and unit types. (Captioned by AI)
The image displays a JSON structure detailing an inventory item, specifically a "DRAXIMAGE SESTAMIBI KIT US (10 vials)," with various attributes including internal ID, vendor information, and unit types. (Captioned by AI)913×400 44.6 KB

I was able to change the display labels within my NS saved search to get celigo to recognize 'Vendor Internal ID' and 'Vendor Name' more distinctly as separate fields, as shown now in my mock output.

8

After a few more refreshes that actually solved my issue! It seems Celigo just couldn't distinguish between the related record internal ID vs the actual records internal ID based on name, so by changing the naming convention it was able to distinguish them separately.