Error: Fail Synchronization Due to The UserID Conflict

  • Updated


The following error occurs and prevents the synchronization:

[Cycle] Fail synchronization due to the UserId conflict. Previous UserId: <005D0000001nZVwIAM>. Current UserId: <005D0000003j6ouIAA>.


[Cycle] Fail synchronization due to the UserId conflict. Previous UserId: <xxxxxxxxxxxxx>. Current UserId: <xxxxxxxxxxxxx>. Reinitialize using - Clear User ID Conflict - option to resolve.



This error indicates that a synchronization had previously been completed for a specific user, but the target users involved in the synchronization have changed.

Effectively, this error is caused by changing which user ID in CRM that is currently associated with the user's synchronization.

Previous Sync

Current Sync

Mailbox Email: Mailbox Email:
CRM Email: CRM Email:
CRM User IDf3f00c89-1e83-f8eb-8541-53922a0f7eaa CRM User ID: ca360487-58a7-c23e-b650-508ac1e4522c

The difference in CRM User ID is detected by Riva and further synchronizations are prevented to avoid possible data corruption. When Riva synchronizes a user, the internal system tracks the database identifiers for each system. If the internal database identifiers that represent the user have changed between sync cycles, then the synchronization will stop.

Possible Root Causes

  • Possible cause #1: Switching the connection from one system to another. Example: Changing from a test or sandbox system to a production system.
  • Possible cause #2: Creating a new user record in the system and assigning that new user record the email address of a previously synchronized user.

The two scenarios described above are very dangerous to the synchronization process. In the above cases, none of the relationships and previously synchronized information will be present for the new user records. If the sync is allowed to continue, this can indicate that all of the previously synchronized records have effectively disappeared.


Impact of possible root cause #1: Any previously synchronized records will no longer be available because none of the internal database identifiers are present in the new production system. Because previously synchronized records are not present and are not available in the new system, all records appear to Riva as though they were deleted. If the sync is allowed to continue, these records will likely be deleted from the other connected system that may still have these records present.

Impact of possible root cause #2: A result similar to what is described in #1 can occur. The risk of potential data loss still exists, even though the previously synchronized records may still exist in the system's internal database. The database unique identifiers between the previous system user and the new system user are not the same. This may result in a similar appearance of data loss because the queries that are executed on the target system use the active user's unique system identifier to determine which records are relevant for the actively synchronizing user. This means that any record assignments in the system that are relationship-based, like a record owner field or a list of user attendees on an appointment, will still be pointing to the old user record, not the newer user record. Without updating all of the relationships in the system from the old unique user identifier to the new unique user identifier, the queries will return results that effectively look like the user has no visible contacts and an empty calendar.


  • For Riva or earlier: Contact the Riva Success Team. Under our guidance, you may need to reinitialize the System_User module.

  • For Riva or higher: Contact the Riva Success Team. If it is confirmed that all the data has been properly migrated to the new CRM user account, the user can be re-initialized with the Clear UserId Conflict re-init option. In some cases, it may be better not to finish migrating the data immediately to the new CRM user account and take a preliminary course of action.

Applies to

  • Riva Cloud.
  • Riva On-Premise.

Was this article helpful?




Article is closed for comments.