Aggreation Based on Dimensions - Aggregation rule: Evaluate_Aggr

Hello Experts,
Can any of you explain to me how do you use the Logical Column Aggregation based on dimensions?. If you can set up a simple example would be great. Also, what is the definition of the aggregation rule : Evaluate_Aggr?, please give a simple example
Thanks for your time
Pablo.

And it's not the same than a level based measure :
The definition of a level based measure :
http://gerardnico.com/wiki/dat/obiee/bi_server/design/fact_table/level_based_measure_calculations
An example with evaluate (lag analytic function)
http://gerardnico.com/wiki/dat/obiee/presentation_service/obiee_period_to_period_lag_lead_function
Check the two and you will see the difference in the definition.

Similar Messages

OBI EE 10g: Bridge tables and Based on Dimensions Aggregation

hi experts,
i am working on OBI EE 10 g (10.1.3.4)
The BM&M layer consist of:
1) Logical fact table "Sale_Indicators"
Fields: SALE_ID (PK, FK),
D1_ID (FK),
D2_ID (FK),
Indicator1 (measure, level of granularity: SALE_ID),
Indicator2 (measure, level of granularity: SALE_ID),
Indicator3 (measure, level of granularity: SALE_ID)
2) Logical dimension table
"Sales" (PK: SALE_ID),
"D1" (PK: D1_ID),
"D2" (PK: D2_ID),
"Customers" (PK: SALE_ID, CUST_ID) - bridge table!
"Products" (PK: SALE_ID, PROD_ID) - bridge table!
3) Dimensions: SalesDim, D1Dim, D2Dim, CustomersDim, ProductsDim
If fact table is joined with bridge table, the number of rows in fact table is multiplied, for example:
D1_ID | SALE_ID | CUST_ID | Indicator1
777 | 1 | 14 | 10
777 | 1 | 17 | 10
777 | 2 | 15 | 12
888 | 3 | 16 | 20
888 | 3 | 17 | 20
888 | 4 | 19 | 30
I need to get report:
D1_ID | Indicator1 (SUM)
777 | 22
888 | 50
and with filter by customer, for example (CUST_ID = 17):
D1_ID | Indicator1 (SUM)
777 | 10
888 | 20
i am trying to use "based on dimension" aggregation, for example (Indicator1):
Dimension Formula
CustomersDim MIN
ProductsDim MIN
Others SUM
The generated physical SQL performs joining EVERY dimension to the fact table, even though they are not included in the final result set.
Is there any way to tweak logical or physical model in order to eliminate excessive joins?
Thanks in advance!
Edited by: 859688 on 31.10.2011 4:04
Edited by: 859688 on 31.10.2011 4:06
Edited by: 859688 on 31.10.2011 4:08

I found this text on the help, but I didn't understand, because when I check the "based on dimensions" check box, I can choose aggregation rules for each dimension, not only the time dimension.
Also, I found in the help menu:
"In the Aggregation tab, select the Based on dimensions check box.
The Browse dialog box automatically opens.
In the Browse dialog box, click New, select a dimension over which you want to aggregate, and then click OK.
In the Aggregation tab, from the Formula drop-down list, select a rule."
I did the same steps suggested by the text above, but it didn't work.

Based on dimension aggregation

I have a fact table with 2 sources. One of these sources has only one measure and I am having problems with it.
This measure must use based on dimension aggregation, but it don't work. When I set this option, the measure shows a blank value in Answers, but when I switch to a default aggregation rule (not based on dimension), like sum or max, the value is shown correctly in Answers.
My doubt is: is it necessary any other configuration on dimensions or fact tables in order to use based on dimensions aggregation? I just change the value in the aggregation tab of the measure, is there any other step necessary?
Thanks

I found this text on the help, but I didn't understand, because when I check the "based on dimensions" check box, I can choose aggregation rules for each dimension, not only the time dimension.
Also, I found in the help menu:
"In the Aggregation tab, select the Based on dimensions check box.
The Browse dialog box automatically opens.
In the Browse dialog box, click New, select a dimension over which you want to aggregate, and then click OK.
In the Aggregation tab, from the Formula drop-down list, select a rule."
I did the same steps suggested by the text above, but it didn't work.

Based on Dimension Aggregation method - OBIEE 11G

Hi,
I have a fact table with one measure value and 3 dimensions (Time, Issue, status). Fact table is loaded monthly data for different issues and with status and a corresponding value.
I want my report to show always issues that is latest of that period and then status of the same.
Lets say:
Fact table has data like this:
31/Jan/2011 - Issue1 - Open - 10
28/Feb/2011 - Issue1 - WIP - 20
31/Mar/2011 - Issue1 - WIP - 30
30/Apr/2011 - Issue1 -WIP - 40
31/May/2011 - Issue1 -Closed - 50
31/May/2011 - Issue2 -Open - 60
31/May/2011 - Issue3 - Open - 20
Now I want to see the report by status and value and it should show me the latest of that time period.
For Quarter1 :
WIP - 30
For Quarter2:
Open - 80
Closed - 50
If I take Year then it should show me :
2011 - Open - 80
2011 - Closed - 50
I tried using aggregation "Based on dimension" option in BMM layer and put Others - Sum() and LAST against time dimension.
But in that case it is giving me the results by status what is latest for the time period. So it is ding sum by other dimension first and then applying LAST method.
In that case result of Quarter -1 will be :
Open - 10
WIP - 30
If I can change the order of aggregation method like first apply LAST method and then do sum then I think desired result will come. But I am not able to change the order.
Is there any other of doing this solution?
Any help is highly appreciated.
Thanks

Hi,
There will be multiple records for an entire month as there are many issues. For a particular Issue it will be one with one particular status for a particular month.
The join is based on the date colum of fact table and the dimension table.
Regards,
SS

How to define an aggregation rule for a dimension based on bridge table?

Hello,
I need a solution for aggregating data correctly when using a dimension based on a set of dimensione tables containing a bridge table. Please find below a description of my business case and the OBIEE model which I’ve created thus far.
Business Case
The company involved wants to report on the number of support cases, the different types of actions that were taken and the people involved in those actions. One support case will undergo a number of actions (called ‘handelingen’) until it is closed. For each action at least one person is involved performing a specific role, but there can also be multiple persons involved with 1 action, each performing a different role for that action. This is the N : N part of the model.
The problem that I face is visible in the two pictures below:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/sample.png
As long as I don’t include anything from the Dimension Meelezer in my report, I get the correct number of handelingen (7). When I include the person (called ‘Meelezer’), the measuere per action is multiplied by the number of persons/roles involved with that action.
When I changed the Aggregation rule in the report column #Handelingen to ‘Server Complex Aggregate’ I do get the correct endtotal:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/sample2.png
I believe it should be possible to define in the repository a different aggregation rule for individual dimensions, but I’ve not been able to achieve this.
Explained below is what I have created in my Physical and Business Model & Mapping layers:
The Physical Model is built like this:
(This is just a small part of a much larger physical model, but I’ve only included the most relevant tables)
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/PhysicalDiagram-1.png
The Fact table (ALS Feit Zaakverloop) contains FK’s for the action (FK_HANDELING, joined to ALS Dim Handeling), the date the action took place (FK_DATUM_ZAAKVERLOOP, joined to ALS Dim Datum Zaakverloop) and the uniqe group of people involved (FK_MEELEZERS, joined to ALS Groep Meelezers) and a measure column (SUM_HANDELINGEN) populated with the value ‘1’ for each row.
The Bridge table (ALS Brug Meelezer/Reden Meelezen) contains three FK’s: FK_GR_MEELEZERS (joined to ALS Groep Meelezers), FK_MEELEZER (joined to ALS Dim Functionaris) and FK_REDEN_MEELEZEN (joined to ALS Dim Reden Meelezen).
The Business Model
In the business model, the four physical tables for the N:N relation have been combined into one logical dimension table.
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/BusinessModel-1.png
DIM Meelezer contains one LTS in which the four physical tables have been combined:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/LTS1.png
And all the required locical columns have been created:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/LTS2.png
DIM Meelezer has also been identified as a bridge table and a Business Key has been defined on a combination of the FK’s in the bridge table and business codes of the two dimension tables.
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/BMDIM.png
Next a hierachy was created for Dim Meelezer:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/Hier.png
In Feit Zaakverloop, a measurement called ‘# Handelingen’ was created using SUM_HANDELINGEN, with an aggregation rule of SUM.
In the LTS of both the DIM Meelezer and Feit Zaakverloop, the Logical Content Levels have both been set to: LVL Detail – Meelezer.
Please provide suggestions that will NOT require changes to the physical datamodel as they would require too much time to achieve (or at leats would not be ready before my deadline.
Thanks!
Edited by: The_Dutchman on Dec 13, 2011 11:43 AM

Hmm, no replies yet...
Am I in 'uncharted territory' with this issue?

Logical column - Aggregation - based on dimensions

Hi,
Can anyone explain the working of the aggregation based on dimension functionality. I understand it is different from level - based measures.
Thanks in advance.
- Priti

Hi priti,
Aggregation based on dimension .
Hav a look at this you get an idea http://gerardnico.com/wiki/dat/obiee/measure_level_based
UPDATED POST
Sorry i gave you the wrong link.This is what your looking for
http://gerardnico.com/wiki/dat/obiee/aggregation_based_on_dimension
follow this etiquette as your new http://forums.oracle.com/forums/ann.jspa?annID=939
Cheers,
KK
Edited by: Kranthi on Feb 24, 2011 12:20 AM

Columns based on first/last aggregation rule not visible in Answers

Hi guru!
I don't understand my mistake!
1. "summ" column in fact table
2. Time dimension with TOTAL-YEAR-QUARTER-MONTH-DAY levels
3. set up for "summ" column last aggregation
4. and set checkbox (based on dimension): for Time dimension LAST, for others SUM
but in Answers this "summ" column is NULL.
why?

Is it possible that the last selected value of the Time dimension has no data? For example, if you're displaying all possible days of 2008, and you haven't loaded Dec-31-2008 data yet, the "last" value selected (i.e. Dec-31-2008) would not yet have been loaded with data, so the LAST aggregation function would return a NULL.
Thought: Try the query using a filter on the Time dimension to select a time period that is already completely loaded with data, and let us know what happens there.

Aggregation based on dimension

Hi all,
Can anyone help me in knowing the difference between normal aggregation set for a measure irrespective of dimensions and different aggregations set for the same measure based on dimension...

hi User,
Look at http://oraclebizint.wordpress.com/2007/12/03/oracle-bi-ee-101332-level-based-measures-lbms/
thanks,
Saichand.v

Aggregation rule ignored for Logical sources

Hi,
We are using materialized views as logical sources for our logical tables. These logical sources contain aggregated data at higher level for dimensions. However, we have a logical source at the most detailed level for the dimensions.
Problem: We OBIEE hits the correct logical source based on dimensions selected in answers, it does not apply the default aggregation rule.
For instance, if a measure has aggregation as AVG, then when the logical sources corresponding to aggregated tables are queried, OBIEE does not apply AVG function. However, it does apply the aggregation rule when it uses the logical source at the most detailed level.
I have specified the aggregation content properly for every dimension.
Any pointers to debug the issue will be helpful.
Thanks,

Click on LTS of Table - Column Mapping - Select the logical column - click on expression - Put your logic here. You will get Aggregation rule is enalbed for the column.
Why ? -- Reason could be nested aggregation is not allowed. Aggregation on the normal column applied during query generation at run time. If you use that Agg.Measure to derive another Agg.measure server could not recognize it during runtime.

Substract as an aggregation rule for different level in a DIM ?!

Hi there..
I'm building a BI model based on financial transactions (incomes, expenses, etc..)
and my main problem is how to substract a measure, where the aggregation rule is set to SUM, for different levels in the "Account" dimension?
Example:
I have the "Account" dimension with the following hierarchy:
Account_ID / Account_name / Account_type / Account_total
And, lets say, 2 rows in it:
1.row in the "Account" dimension:
account_ID : 100
account_name : "Marketing expense"
account_type : "Variable expenses"
account_total : "Total profit" (total income - total Expenses)
2. row in the "Account" dimension:
account_ID : 200
account_name : "Financial incomes"
account_type : "Total incomes"
account_total : "Total profit" (total income - total Expenses)
"Total profit"
"Tot. incomes" "Tot. Expenses"
"Finan. incomes" "Market. expenses"
The fact table has just one measure: "Amount" and, of course, some foreign keys:
Account_ID -> "Account" dim
Organization_ID -> "Organization" dim
Date -> "Date" dim
Amount
The measure "Amount" in the fact table is positive both for expenses and incomes.
Now, what I'm trying to do is to sum up that measure on my top level in the "Account" dim.
At that level my report in Answers should substract "Total expenses" from "Total incomes"!
How can I do that?
thanks..
Ivan

Sorry to pop the obvious question, but can't you model that nicely and put it into distinct columns?
If not, you can create derived measures on you fact using "case when" statements. One for the incomes with amount > 0 (or >=0 ...depends on where you want to have the 0's) and one for the expenses with amount < 0.
HTH,
Chris

How to set Grand Total of a Measure when its aggregation rule is Max in Logical Layer

Hi
I have a Measure Column (Budget) and in Logical layer the aggregation rule is set as (Max) which looks like Max(Budget). But now it is included in the report and when my client is trying to see its grand total, it is giving the Max Budget figure of the report rather than giving the total sum(grand total).
Kindly share some ideas in achieving the grand total without disturbing the actual aggregation of the measure.

Thank You for your reply.
In my case i don't have a problem with aggregation for Budget Measure(max(Fact_XXKC_SHIP_TO_BUDGET_CAT_F.SALESREP_BUDGET_YTD)). This is the aggregation rule applied on the Salesrep Budget YTD.
Now i created a report with columns
Salesrepresntative(Dimension),, Sales Invoices(Measure1),, SALESREP_BUDGET_YTD(Measure 2).
In the above report the values are perfect, but when we used Grand total option at ROW level in table view, the grand total of Measure1 is cumulative of all the rows, but the Grand total of SALESREP_BUDGET_YTD (measure2) is the max of all the columns.
What i require is the Grand total of SALESREP_BUDGET_YTD (measure 2) should be cumulative of all the columns.
I have shared my SQL query, kindly verify it and share any idea.
select sum(case when T97600.W_XACT_TYPE_CODE = 'Chargeback' then T93664.NET_AMT * T93664.GLOBAL1_EXCHANGE_RATE end ) as c1,
sum(case when T97600.W_XACT_TYPE_CODE = 'Credit Memo' then T93664.NET_AMT * T93664.GLOBAL1_EXCHANGE_RATE end ) as c2,
sum(case when T97600.W_XACT_TYPE_CODE = 'Debit Memo' then T93664.NET_AMT * T93664.GLOBAL1_EXCHANGE_RATE end ) as c3,
sum(case when T97600.W_XACT_TYPE_CODE = 'Standard Invoice' then T93664.NET_AMT * T93664.GLOBAL1_EXCHANGE_RATE when T97600.W_XACT_TYPE_CODE = 'Invoice Cancellation' then T93664.NET_AMT * -1 * T93664.GLOBAL1_EXCHANGE_RATE end ) as c4,
T315597.XXKC_RESOURCE_NAME as c5
from
W_CUSTOMER_LOC_USE_D T315597 /* Dim_W_CUSTOMER_LOC_USE_D_Status */ ,
W_SALES_INVOICE_LINE_F T93664 /* Fact_W_SALES_INVOICE_LINE_F */ ,
W_XACT_TYPE_D T97600 /* Dim_W_XACT_TYPE_D_Sales_Ivclns */
where ( T93664.XACT_TYPE_WID = T97600.ROW_WID and T93664.DELETE_FLG = 'N' and T93664.XX_SHIP_TO_LOC_USE_WID = T315597.ROW_WID )
group by T315597.XXKC_RESOURCE_NAME
) D1 full outer join (select max(T313184.SALESREP_BUDGET_YTD) as c1,
T315597.XXKC_RESOURCE_NAME as c2
from
W_CUSTOMER_LOC_USE_D T315597 /* Dim_W_CUSTOMER_LOC_USE_D_Status */ ,
XXKC_SHIP_TO_BUDGET_CAT_F T313184 /* Fact_XXKC_SHIP_TO_BUDGET_CAT_F */
where ( T313184.SITE_USE_WID = T315597.ROW_WID )
group by T315597.XXKC_RESOURCE_NAME

Preaggregation across value based hierarchy dimension in 11g

Hi All,
I have created a cube with 6 dimensions in olap 11g. One of those six dimensions has only one hierarchy which is value based hierarchy. I have chosen level based aggregation as I know at what levels exactly users are going to query. When I was going through the dimensions to choose levels to preaggregate I noticed there were no options available for my value based hierarchy dimension ( I could see "all" option for the same case in 10g) then I tried to look for definitions of underlying objects just to make sure it will preaggregate data across my value based hierarchy dimension.
I found value set corresponding to my value based hierarchy dimension in <CUBE NAME>SOLVEAGGMAP object , which AWM uses to decide which dimension values to preaggregate but if I do rpr on that value set (rp r<CUBE NAME>SOLVE<DIMENSION NAME>_PVSET) it shows NA so my question is can I pre aggregate across value based hierarchy dimension in olap 11g?
Olap Version: 11.2.0.1
AWM version: 11.2.0.1
Thanks

Even if you know exactly which levels your users will query, percent based precompute (e.g. 30%) may still be faster in practice because queries are returned using 'sparse looping' instead of 'dense looping'. This was the single biggest performance advantage of 11g over 10g.
But if you still want to use level based precompute, then you should look at the XML template for the cube (as saved by AWM, for example). In it you should find something called PrecomputeCondition. This defines the set of members that are precomputed. Here is an example I just created using the GLOBAL schema
<PrecomputeCondition>
<![CDATA[
"TIME" LEVELS ("TIME"."MONTH", "TIME".CALENDAR_QUARTER, "TIME".CALENDAR_YEAR),
CHANNEL LEVELS (CHANNEL.TOTAL_CHANNEL, CHANNEL.CHANNEL),
CUSTOMER LEVELS (CUSTOMER.MARKET_SEGMENT, CUSTOMER.REGION, CUSTOMER.SHIP_TO),
PRODUCT LEVELS (PRODUCT.CLASS, PRODUCT.FAMILY, PRODUCT.ITEM)]]>
</PrecomputeCondition>The PrecomputeCondition is also visible through the USER_CUBES view.
SELECT PRECOMPUTE_CONDITION
FROM USER_CUBES
WHERE CUBE_NAME = 'MY_CUBE';You can hand modify this condition in the XML to specify an alternative 'non level based' precompute condition for any dimension. For example, if you define an attribute named 'SHOULD_PRECOMPUTE' on your PRODUCT dimension that is 1 for members to be precomputed and 0 for all others, then you can change the condition as follows.
<PrecomputeCondition>
<![CDATA[
"TIME" LEVELS ("TIME"."MONTH", "TIME".CALENDAR_QUARTER, "TIME".CALENDAR_YEAR),
CHANNEL LEVELS (CHANNEL.TOTAL_CHANNEL, CHANNEL.CHANNEL),
CUSTOMER LEVELS (CUSTOMER.MARKET_SEGMENT, CUSTOMER.REGION, CUSTOMER.SHIP_TO),
PRODUCT WHERE PRODUCT.SHOULD_PRECOMPUTE = 1]]>
</PrecomputeCondition>If you recreate the cube from the XML with this condition, then the PVSET valueset you discovered should contain all dimension members for which the attribute value is 1.   This gives you complete control over what is precomputed.   Note that AWM doesn't support this form of condition, so it won't show up if you go to the Precompute tab, but it is valid for the server. The PL/SQL below will modify the PrecomputeCondition (for the cube named MYCUBE) without going through AWM.
begin
dbms_cube.import_xml(q'!
<Metadata
Version="1.3"
MinimumDatabaseVersion="11.2.0.2">
<Cube Name="MY_CUBE">
    <Organization>
      <AWCubeOrganization>
        <PrecomputeCondition>
          <![CDATA[
           "TIME" LEVELS ("TIME"."MONTH","TIME".CALENDAR_QUARTER, "TIME".CALENDAR_YEAR),
           CHANNEL LEVELS (CHANNEL.TOTAL_CHANNEL,CHANNEL.CHANNEL),
           CUSTOMER LEVELS (CUSTOMER.MARKET_SEGMENT,CUSTOMER.REGION,CUSTOMER.SHIP_TO),
           PRODUCT WHERE PRODUCT.SHOULD_PRECOMPUTE = 1]]>
        </PrecomputeCondition>
      </AWCubeOrganization>
    </Organization>
</Cube>
</Metadata>
end;
/

The reasoning behind aggregation rules at report level

Hello guys
I notice that in the answer criteria, we can define column formula of each columns in the request, but we can also set aggregation rules for the numeric columns..
I'd like to have a deeper understanding on how these settings work..
The Avg, Max, Min, Count are pretty clear and self-explanatory to me.
My main question is the difference between 'default', 'Server determined', 'complex server aggregate', and 'Sum'.
In a lot of the measure columns when the aggregate rule is 'default', when I do subtotaling in report views, I would actually get the right total amount by dimension columns, however there are also places in the report where the sub total is off, so I have to go and set the aggregate rule of that measure to 'Sum' then the total becomes correct 100%. When I try 'server determined', 'complex server aggregate', some measures change and some don't, but this is not in a pattern of change that I can understand the concept behind. The OBIEE documents said very little about this part
So is there more detailed information out there that explains more about what these options are doing?
Thanks in advance

Hi Shruthi,
To be clear you have one table 'DIM_LF_B' and its separated out as FACT and DIM in BMM layer with respective formulas ? If yes check this http://www.varanasisaichand.com/2012/04/fact-and-dimension-from-single-source.html
let me know if it is different
Thanks,
Saichand

Different Aggregation rule while aggregating

Hi Folks
in OBIEE 10.1.3.4.1 and BI Apps 7.9.6, using answers, i developed a report which has Organization division dimension and active headcounts as fact. while the report is created, the default aggregation( Server determined) rule that the server is using gives wrong results i.e. the grand total of the active Headcounts results to 9603 where as when i explicitly give "sum" as aggregation rule, i get the summation of the headcounts in the active headcount column which results in 25000. i checked this physical queries and couldnt get a clear understanding of the physical db queries. there is an aggregation rule on the Active headcount in the rpd which is like this
:- LAST(Core."Fact - HR - Operation (Workforce)"."Active Headcount") with time dimension
:- SUM(Core."Fact - HR - Operation (Workforce)"."Active Headcount") with any other dimension
and there is a case statement in expression builder like this:
CASE WHEN "Oracle Data Warehouse"."Catalog"."dbo"."Dim_W_EMPLOYMENT_D"."W_EMPLOYMENT_STAT_CODE" = 'A' THEN "Oracle Data Warehouse"."Catalog"."dbo"."Fact_W_WRKFC_EVT_MONTH_F_Snapshot"."HEADCOUNT" ELSE 0 END
btw, i did not create the same report with time dimension first and when i combined it with time dimension, i get the same results as before.
here are the different queries from log:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
With out aggregation:
WITH
SAWITH0 AS (select T334016.ORG_HIER13_NAME as c2,
T334016.ORG_HIER13_NUM as c3,
sum(case when T264890.W_EMPLOYMENT_STAT_CODE = 'A' then T535616.HEADCOUNT else 0 end ) as c4,
T277242.PER_NAME_YEAR as c5
from
W_INT_ORG_DH T334016 /* Dim_W_INT_ORG_DH_Employee_Org */ ,
W_EMPLOYMENT_D T264890 /* Dim_W_EMPLOYMENT_D */ ,
W_YEAR_D T277242 /* Dim_W_YEAR_D */ ,
W_WRKFC_EVT_MONTH_F T535616 /* Fact_W_WRKFC_EVT_MONTH_F_Snapshot */
where ( T264890.ROW_WID = T535616.EMPLOYMENT_WID and T277242.ROW_WID = T535616.EVENT_YEAR_WID and T334016.ORG_WID = T535616.HR_ORG_WID and T535616.SNAPSHOT_IND = 1 and T535616.DELETE_FLG <> 'Y' and T277242.CAL_YEAR_START_DT >= TO_DATE('2004-01-01 00:00:00' , 'YYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS') and (T535616.SNAPSHOT_MONTH_END_IND in (1) or T535616.EFFECTIVE_END_DATE >= TO_DATE('2009-10-12' , 'YYYY-MM-DD')) and (T535616.LAST_MONTH_IN_YEAR_IND in (1) or T535616.EFFECTIVE_END_DATE >= TO_DATE('2009-10-12' , 'YYYY-MM-DD')) and (T334016.ROW_WID in (0) or T334016.HR_ORG_FLG in ('Y')) and (T334016.ROW_WID in (0) or T334016.W_HIERARCHY_CLASS in ('HR-ORG')) and (T334016.ROW_WID in (0) or T334016.CURRENT_VER_HIER_FLG in ('Y')) and T535616.EFFECTIVE_START_DATE <= TO_DATE('2009-10-12' , 'YYYY-MM-DD') )
group by T277242.PER_NAME_YEAR, T334016.ORG_HIER13_NUM, T334016.ORG_HIER13_NAME)
select distinct SAWITH0.c2 as c1,
LAST_VALUE(SAWITH0.c4 IGNORE NULLS) OVER (PARTITION BY SAWITH0.c3 ORDER BY SAWITH0.c3 NULLS FIRST, SAWITH0.c5 NULLS FIRST ROWS BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING) as c2,
SAWITH0.c3 as c3
from
SAWITH0
order by c1
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<With aggregation:
-------------------- Sending query to database named Oracle Data Warehouse (id: <<8194579>>):
WITH
SAWITH0 AS (select T334016.ORG_HIER13_NAME as c2,
T334016.ORG_HIER13_NUM as c3,
sum(case when T264890.W_EMPLOYMENT_STAT_CODE = 'A' then T535616.HEADCOUNT else 0 end ) as c4,
T277242.PER_NAME_YEAR as c5
from
W_INT_ORG_DH T334016 /* Dim_W_INT_ORG_DH_Employee_Org */ ,
W_EMPLOYMENT_D T264890 /* Dim_W_EMPLOYMENT_D */ ,
W_YEAR_D T277242 /* Dim_W_YEAR_D */ ,
W_WRKFC_EVT_MONTH_F T535616 /* Fact_W_WRKFC_EVT_MONTH_F_Snapshot */
where ( T264890.ROW_WID = T535616.EMPLOYMENT_WID and T277242.ROW_WID = T535616.EVENT_YEAR_WID and T334016.ORG_WID = T535616.HR_ORG_WID and T535616.SNAPSHOT_IND = 1 and T535616.DELETE_FLG <> 'Y' and T277242.CAL_YEAR_START_DT >= TO_DATE('2004-01-01 00:00:00' , 'YYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS') and (T535616.SNAPSHOT_MONTH_END_IND in (1) or T535616.EFFECTIVE_END_DATE >= TO_DATE('2009-10-12' , 'YYYY-MM-DD')) and (T535616.LAST_MONTH_IN_YEAR_IND in (1) or T535616.EFFECTIVE_END_DATE >= TO_DATE('2009-10-12' , 'YYYY-MM-DD')) and (T334016.ROW_WID in (0) or T334016.HR_ORG_FLG in ('Y')) and (T334016.ROW_WID in (0) or T334016.W_HIERARCHY_CLASS in ('HR-ORG')) and (T334016.ROW_WID in (0) or T334016.CURRENT_VER_HIER_FLG in ('Y')) and T535616.EFFECTIVE_START_DATE <= TO_DATE('2009-10-12' , 'YYYY-MM-DD') )
group by T277242.PER_NAME_YEAR, T334016.ORG_HIER13_NUM, T334016.ORG_HIER13_NAME),
SAWITH1 AS (select D1.c1 as c1,
D1.c2 as c2,
D1.c3 as c3
from
(select LAST_VALUE(SAWITH0.c4 IGNORE NULLS) OVER (PARTITION BY SAWITH0.c3 ORDER BY SAWITH0.c3 NULLS FIRST, SAWITH0.c5 NULLS FIRST ROWS BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING) as c1,
SAWITH0.c2 as c2,
SAWITH0.c3 as c3,
ROW_NUMBER() OVER (PARTITION BY SAWITH0.c3 ORDER BY SAWITH0.c3 ASC) as c4
from
SAWITH0
) D1
where ( D1.c4 = 1 ) ),
SAWITH2 AS (select sum(case when T264890.W_EMPLOYMENT_STAT_CODE = 'A' then T535616.HEADCOUNT else 0 end ) as c2,
T277242.PER_NAME_YEAR as c3
from
W_EMPLOYMENT_D T264890 /* Dim_W_EMPLOYMENT_D */ ,
W_YEAR_D T277242 /* Dim_W_YEAR_D */ ,
W_WRKFC_EVT_MONTH_F T535616 /* Fact_W_WRKFC_EVT_MONTH_F_Snapshot */
where ( T264890.ROW_WID = T535616.EMPLOYMENT_WID and T277242.ROW_WID = T535616.EVENT_YEAR_WID and T535616.SNAPSHOT_IND = 1 and T535616.DELETE_FLG <> 'Y' and T277242.CAL_YEAR_START_DT >= TO_DATE('2004-01-01 00:00:00' , 'YYYY-MM-DD HH24:MI:SS') and (T535616.SNAPSHOT_MONTH_END_IND in (1) or T535616.EFFECTIVE_END_DATE >= TO_DATE('2009-10-12' , 'YYYY-MM-DD')) and (T535616.LAST_MONTH_IN_YEAR_IND in (1) or T535616.EFFECTIVE_END_DATE >= TO_DATE('2009-10-12' , 'YYYY-MM-DD')) and T535616.EFFECTIVE_START_DATE <= TO_DATE('2009-10-12' , 'YYYY-MM-DD') )
group by T277242.PER_NAME_YEAR),
SAWITH3 AS (select distinct LAST_VALUE(SAWITH2.c2 IGNORE NULLS) OVER ( ORDER BY SAWITH2.c3 NULLS FIRST ROWS BETWEEN UNBOUNDED PRECEDING AND UNBOUNDED FOLLOWING) as c1
from
SAWITH2)
select SAWITH1.c2 as c1,
SAWITH1.c1 as c2,
SAWITH1.c3 as c4,
SAWITH3.c1 as c5
from
SAWITH1,
SAWITH3
Thank you in advance
kumr

Passing parameters from one report to another. If you go to Column Properties you will find 2 main types of Drills. One is a default drill which comes from the repository. The other is a navigation drill wherein you can specify a target report. So basically when you click on the column of your report that will navigate to another report and will also pass the parameter(value clicked) and will filter the target report. I am not sure which version of OBI EE you are on?
Thanks,
Venkat
http://oraclebizint.wordpress.com

Default Aggregation Rule

Can someone explain me as to how BI interprets the default aggregation rule.
Say when we say the defualt aggregation rule on the sales fact table column revenue is SUM. what does it actually imply.
Similarly when we use the Aggregation Content tab in the Logical table source and set aggregation content group by what does it actually mean.
Thanks,
Chan

If you didnt set content tab that would be default aggregation, means based on the columns pull in the criteria SUM changes like drill down or roll up.
'Group by' clause keep on changes as per the column in the criteria.
When you set any level for a metric then it alway aggregated to that level, values will not change as per column selection.
Pls mark if helps
Edited by: Srini VEERAVALLI on Nov 1, 2012 4:48 AM
Any updates on this?
Edited by: Srini VEERAVALLI on Jan 7, 2013 1:56 PM

Aggreation Based on Dimensions - Aggregation rule: Evaluate_Aggr

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for