Star schema without a fact table?

Hi,
I'm preparing my warehouse for using with Discoverer and my question is about the star schema.
- Is a star schema directly associated with data warehouse?
- Can I talk about a star schema if a) I do not have a fact table (no summarized values) and b) if I do not have a dimension of time?
The problem is, I'm thinking of usine Discoverer but should I use it if it's not connected to a data warehouse?
As I told, I'd like to modelized my data "like" a star schema but my "center table" will contain only the foreign key of my dimensions; no time dimensions, no aggregate data in the center table (fact table).
Is there another word for the model I'd like to do?
Thank in advance.

Hi,
Is a star schema directly associated with data warehouse?Not really, a star schema is just one where there is one large fact table joined to many smaller dimension tables using key fields. You usually see this in data warehouses.
Can I talk about a star schema if a) I do not have a fact table (no summarized values) and b) if I do not have a dimension of time?A star schema must have a fact table but it doesn't need contain summarised values or a time dimension.
You can use Discoverer with any Oracle database, it doesn't have to be a data warehouse.
Rod West

Similar Messages

  • Resolving loops in a star schema with 5 fact tables and 6 dimension tables

    Hello
    I have a star schema, ie 5 FACT tables and 7 dimension tables, All fact tables share the same dimension tables, some FACT tables share 3 dimesnsions, while other share 5 dimensions.  
    I did adopt the best practices, and as recommended in the book, I tried to resolve them using Context, as it is the recommended option to Alias in a star schema setting.  The contexts are resolved, but I still have loops.  I also cleared the Multiple SQL Statement for each context option, but no luck.  I need to get this resoved ASAP

    Hi Patil,
    It is not clear what exactly is the problem. As a starting point you could set the context up so that it only covers the joins from fact to dimension.
    Fact A, joins Dim 1, Dim 2, Dim 3, and Dim 4
    Fact B, joins Dim 1, Dim 2, Dim 3, Dim 4 and Dim 5
    Fact C, joins Dim 1, Dim 2, Dim 3, Dim 4 and Dim 6
    Fact D, joins Dim 1, Dim 2, Dim 3, Dim 4 and Dim 7
    Fact E, joins Dim 1, Dim 2, Dim 4 and Dim 6
    If each of these are contexts are done and just cover the joins from fact to dim then you should be not get loops.
    If you could lay out your joins like above then it may be possible to specify the contexts/aliases that should work.
    Regards
    Alan

  • How to join  2 star schemas  using a Dimensional table( like Bridge Table)

    How to join 2 star schemas using a Dimensional table( like Bridge Table) in OBIEE?

    Complex joins and Content levels is all you need, have you tried the forum search?

  • Steps to create Universe without using Fact Table

    Dear All,
    i am confronting with a problem by creating an Universe.
    The problem is that we do no have any fact table.
    Could you please  explain the steps for creating an universe without fatc table?
    Thanks
    Pat

    The first thing to do is identify the tables in your schema that contain measures. These will be your base tables for contexts.
    Then identify all the tables that relate to each of your candidate fact tables.
    You may identify two related tables, both with facts in, which would give you a fan trap.
    Say you have a schema with only three tables and they are related as: T1 -< T2 -< T3
    T2 and T3 both have measure columns.
    What you would need to do is create an alias of T2 (AT2) and join it to T2.
    You would then have two contexts, T1-< T2 , T2-< T3 and T1-<T2, T2- AT2
    For objects from T2, derive the dimensions from T2 and the measures from AT2.
    Beyond that, it's fairly standard.
    If you have a data schema it is going to be much easier for you.

  • Relationship between Dimension without linking Fact table

    Hi,
    My question is like I have five dimensions connected to a fact table through primary - foreign key(Composite Key) relationship. Will this referential integrity help if I want some information between two dimension which are not linked directly and I am not
    including any measures from fact table .
    Example: Suppose I have customer, Product and Manufacturer Dimensions all linked to a fact table but  not linked to each other directly  but can I get right result when I want to know what are the manufacturer for each product? or list of
    customers using a particular product. Will the referential integrity work ? since they all are related in fact table.
    regards
    Sanjoy ghosh 

    Hi Sanjoy -
    The answer to your questions depends on your dimensional design and exactly what the fact table represents.  Fact tables naturally capture the intersection of the different dimensions.  This is true whether you physically implement a
    PK - FK relationship in the relational db.  
    In your case, since customer is involved, sounds like a sales transaction fact.  If that's true, you can easily join from customer, through the fact, to the product dimension, to get the list of customers that purchased a particular product.
    For the manufacturer for each product, a sales transaction fact will not necessarily answer this question completely.  Particularly in the case of products that have no sales for a given period, and thus, don't have any fact records to join from manufacturer
    across to product.  If you need to solve this question, you have some other options:
    - flatten the Manufacturer directly into the Product dimension as attribute of the product (probably the simplest approach and allows you to remove a key from the fact)
    - embed the Manufacturer key directly in the Product dimension (if you need the Manufacturer dimension separate for use with other events / facts and more detailed dimensionality - i.e., detailed attributes about the Manufacturer that wouldn't need
    to be flattened onto the product)
    - build a factless fact that captures the products offered by a given manufacturer at a given point in time (perhaps representing various products catalogs and associated dates.  This would allow you to capture rich details about each dimension separately
    and use the factless fact to record)
    Let me know if that helps.
    Brent Greenwood, MS, MCITP, CBIP
    // Please mark correct answers and helpful posts //
    http://brentgreenwood.blogspot.com

  • [OBIEE 11g] Enforce star-schema without security filter?

    I have imported my first OLAP cube using the instructions <a href = 'http://www.oracle.com/webfolder/technetwork/tutorials/obe/db/11g/r1/olap/biee/createbieemetadata.htm'>here</a> and have applied the necessary security filter to force the star join between the cube and dimension views. However, the security filter does not apply to users in the BI Administrator user group. Is there any way to do this without a security filter, or somehow apply the security filter even when the user is an administrator?
    Edited by: islan on Jan 22, 2013 7:56 AM
    Edited by: islan on Jan 22, 2013 7:57 AM

    The link in your first posting points to the old-way of creating OBIEE metadata for OLAP objects.
    Starting with OBIEE 11.1.1.5, it is much simpler as Oracle-OLAP is one of the data sources in BI-Admin Tool.
    So do not use the old way.
    Start with this doc:
    http://www.oracle.com/webfolder/technetwork/tutorials/obe/fmw/bi/bi11115/olap/olap.htm
    For your other issue, you need this troubleshooting doc:
    http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/database/options/olap/troubleshootingbieeconnections-504856.pdf
    Note that even though it says OBIEE 11.1.1.5, the above two docs are applicable to 11.1.1.6 and future releases.
    For security, you should define it in OBIEE instead of doing in OLAP.
    .

  • Converting 3 tables to a star schema ??

    Hi i was trying to prepare a very small demo for an OLAP system. Anyways I have a simple transaction database for a supposed Book Store anyways the database has the following 3 tables :
    Table No:1
    Table Name:Main Table
    This Table contains the following columns:
    Customer Name (PK) | Book Purchase ID (PK) | PRICE
    Table No:2
    Table Name:Customer Table
    This Table contains the following columns:
    Customer Name | CELL | ADDRESS
    Table No:3
    Table Name:BOOKS Table
    This Table contains the following columns:
    BOOK Name | Book Purchase ID | GENRE
    so the above is my transactional database.. LEt me know if i am missing any other detail. Anyways now i want to convert the above to start schema ?? How would i acccomplish that .. I tried to read a couple of tutorials but i was a bit confused... so if you guys could assist me on this i would be really thnakfull.

    David_Aldridge wrote:
    thinking in general about this, it sounds like what you need is a set of four tables:
    Dim_Cust -- stores customer details as a dimension
    Dim_Book -- stores book details as a dimension
    Dim_Date -- stores dates for transactions
    Fct_Book_Sales -- stores the transactions themselves as the purchase of a book for a certain price by a customer on a date.
    Use synthetic keys for all but the Dim_Date.Okay i kind of got lost on the way here is wht i know so far regarding the star schema
    "A star schema consists of fact tables and dimension tables. Fact tables contain the quantitative or factual data about a business--the information being queried. This information is often numerical, additive measurements and can consist of many columns and millions or billions of rows. Dimension tables are usually smaller and hold descriptive data that reflects the dimensions, or attributes, of a business. SQL queries then use joins between fact and dimension tables and constraints on the data to return selected information."
    so from your explaination there are going to be 3 dimension tables
    Dim_Cust (Details about the customers) (Customer_ID,Cell No,Address)
    Dim_Book(Details about the Books) (Book Name ,ID,Genre)
    Dates (I am confused about the dates part)
    Fct_Book_Sales (Confused about this part also)
    and one last thing What would the fact table look like ??

  • How to combine multiple fact tables and dimensions in one worksheet?

    Hello Forum,
    I am encountering a reporting problem when trying to create a worksheet that uses more than one cube/fact table and common dimensions. I have used Oracle Warehouse Builder 10Gr2 to design and deploy a pretty simple ROLAP data mart. We are using Discoverer Plus for OLAP as our reporting tool. We have 5 dimension tables using a star schema and 3 fact tables, when I create the worksheet I bring in our sales measure from our sales item table and then Store_Name from my Stores Dimension and then day from my time dimension, everything looks good at the stage, we're just trying to get a sum of all sales for that store on that day. Then I bring in a measure from our advertising cost table and a join window pops up asking which join to use, if I choose either the Store or the Time dimension I get correct data for the first fact table (sales) and grossly incorrect data for the ad cost measure from the second fact table (advertsing costs)...... any help would be appreciated

    You have encountered one of the key limitations of Discoverer... which I complained about to the Discoverer product manager at OpenWorld in 2001....
    Anyhow, to get around this, you are going to have to deal with it either in the database, (views, materialized views, tables), or within the admin tool by creating a custom folder.
    Discoverer also calls this the "fan trap", but never really had a solution to the problem. [The solution only worked is you joined to one and only one dimension!]
    What you want (using Sales_Fact and Inventory_Fact as an example) is to join Sales to Time, Store, and Product, and save that result. Then join Inventory to Time, Store, and Product, save that result, then do a double outer join between the two intermediate temporary tables in order to calculate something useful like inventory turns by store and product line.
    This is also known a "multipass SQL", and is supported by some (but not many) other tools.
    So, to accomplish this with Discoverer, you'll either need to create a view, or table, or materialized view that has already put Sales and Inventory into a single (virtual?) fact table. Alternatively you can write the SQL for how to do this linkage (don't forget to handle missing data), and use the Discoverer admin tool to create a custom folder that uses your SQL.
    Hope this helps!

  • Confirmed Dimensions. OBIEE Not able to pull data from two fact tables.

    Hi Experts,
    I have a very simple set up of Star Schema with two fact tables and 1 dimension. Both fact tables joined to the dimension at the same level.
    When i pull a column from both fact tables and the dimension table in OBIEE, it has to create simple SQL like below:
    select FACT1.column1,
    Fact2.Column1,
    Dim.Column1
    from FACT1, FACT2, DIM
    where FACT1.ID = DIM.ID and FACT2.ID = DIM.ID
    but instead it creating a query in a very complex way:
    select case  when D1.c2 is not null then D1.c2 when D2.c2 is not null then D2.c2 end  as c2,
         D1.c1 as c3,
         D2.c1 as c4
    from
         (select FACT1.Column1 as c1,
                   DIM.Column1 as c2
              from
                   DIM T1287863,              
                   FACT1 T1287945              
       where  (DIM.ID = FACT1.ID)
           ) D1 full outer join (
            select FACT2.Column1 as c1,
                   DIM.Column1 as c2
              from
                   DIM,              
                   FACT2
              where  ( DIM.ID = FACT2.ID)
         ) D2 On isnull(D1.c2 , '1') = isnull(D2.c2 , '1') and isnull(D1.c2 , '2') = isnull(D2.c2 , '2')
    I even tried setting the levels for both the fact tables and it still creates the query in avove way. Any thoughts on this will be vary helpful.

    Subramanian,
    see below the code we're using for the RFM.
    on the ct_containers table i'm passing a line, and its getting updated after the call.
    on the ct_errors table i just want to receive the errors and i only receive the line, we add manually there ('Serious error with validation code').
    kr, achim
    FUNCTION zbapi_ra_validations .
    *"*"Local Interface:
    *"  IMPORTING
    *"     VALUE(IS_RA_SCREEN) TYPE  ZBAPI_S_RA_SCREEN
    *"  CHANGING
    *"     VALUE(CT_ERRORS) TYPE  ZRA_T_ERRORS
    *"     VALUE(CT_CONTAINERS) TYPE  ZRA_T_CONT_IP
      DATA:
        lo_badi_handle TYPE REF TO zra_validation_rule,
        ls_error       TYPE zra_s_error.
      GET BADI lo_badi_handle.
      TRY.
          CALL BADI lo_badi_handle->validate_rules
            EXPORTING
              is_screen_flds = is_ra_screen
            CHANGING
              ct_containers  = ct_containers
              ct_errors      = ct_errors.
        CATCH zcx_ra.
          ls_error-message = 'Serious error with validation code'.
          APPEND ls_error TO ct_errors.
      ENDTRY.
    ENDFUNCTION.
    if i call this rfm in SE37 the ct_errors table is populated with all errors and the manually created line.
    Message was edited by: Achim Hauck

  • Classic Star Schema

    Hi Gurus,
    I have a couple of doubts related to Classic Star Schema
    When SAP BW Star Schema has so many advantages as compared to Classic Star Schema, is the Classic Star Schema being used in any of the products?
    If the answer is NO what are they using?
    Thanks in advance.
    Regards,
    Neo.

    Hi Neo,
    Now Classic Star Schema is not used.
    In a Star schema, one dimension represents one table. These dimension tables surround the fact table,which contains the facts (key figures), and are linked to that fact table via unique keys, one per dimension table. Each dimension key uniquely identifies a row in the associated dimension table. Together these
    dimension keys uniquely identify a specific row in the fact table.
    check this link from help.sap.
    http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw04/helpdata/en/4c/89dc37c7f2d67ae10000009b38f889/frameset.htm
    The key elements of a Star schema are:<b>advantages as compared to Classic Star Schema</b>
    • Central fact table with dimension tables shooting off from it
    • Fact tables typically store atomic and aggregate transaction information, such as quantitative
    amounts of goods sold. They are called facts.
    • Facts are numeric values of a normally additive nature.
    • Fact tables contain foreign keys to the most atomic dimension attribute of each dimension table.
    • Foreign keys tie the fact table rows to specific rows in each of the associated dimension tables.
    • The points of the star are dimension tables.
    • Dimension tables store both attributes about the data stored in the fact table and textual data.
    • Dimension tables are de-normalized.
    • The most atomic dimension attributes in the dimensions define the granularity of the information,
    i.e. the number of records in the fact table.
    cheers
    Sunil

  • External star schema?

    hi friends,
    in extrenal starschema  fact tabel is connected dimension table dimension table is connected sid sid is connetced with master data. here sid means setid or surrogated id. why we are udning sid for this?
    Thanking u
    suneel.

    hi suneel
      SID means Surrogate ID.
      BIW is completed based on extended star schema. The fact table is connected to the dimension tables and the dimension table is connected to the master data, Attributes, Texts and hierarchies.The reason why we connect with SID is multiple infocube dimension characteristics can access the same master data at the same time.
    Hope it helps...

  • Star Schema tables Creation

    If I am creating a BI analytical application from sample Sales Hisotory schema's transactional data, what is the first Step I need to do? Should I create a star schema from the transactional tables? If this is correct, What I tool I need to use to create such tables with data? I believe once this is done I can create dimensions , measures and cubes using OWM11g. Some on please help me. I am very very new to OLAP , But has lots of interest in it
    Thanks
    George

    Hi George,
    If you are working with 11g - did you install all the latest patches? I strongly recommend applying all available patches when working with 11g. All the information you need is here - http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/bi/olap/collateral/olap_certification.html
    As for your question about the criteria for desgining dimension tables, the best advice I can offer is to work with star or snowflake dimensions. You can also see sample schema designs for both at these links
    Also, in case you haven't already seen it, there is a good blog posting on working with different kinds of dimensions/hierarchies here - http://oracleolap.blogspot.com/2008/01/olap-workshop-4-managing-different.html
    Finally, you might find this [white paper|http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/warehouse/pdf/Benefits%20of%20a%20multi-dimensional%20model.pdf] useful as you say you are new to OLAP
    Let me know how you get on
    Thanks,
    Stuart Bunby
    OLAP Blog: http://oracleOLAP.blogspot.com
    OLAP Wiki: http://wiki.oracle.com/page/Oracle+OLAP+Option
    OLAP on OTN: http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/bi/olap/index.html
    DW on OTN : http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/bi/db/11g/index.html

  • No query rewriting in a star schema

    Gentlemen,
    I am facing a problem with query rewriting in a simple data warehouse star schema. I want to take advantage of the built-in roll up along dimensions of a star schema. Therefore, I created several DIMENSIONs and made sure that all foreign key/primary key relationships between fact and dimension tables are set up correctly. In addition, as many table attributes as possible are assigned the NOT NULL constraint, especially the ones that are used by the CHILD Of and ATTRIBUTE relationships.
    I defined materialized views on the fact table and a couple of dimension tables to report on aggregated data. All the MVIEWs are enabled for query rewriting and I have the initialization parameter set correctly (QUERY_REWRITE_INTEGRITY is set to TRUSTED).
    From my tests I learned that a query is rewritten correctly only of the corresponding MVIEW contains the fact table and one dimension table. This is true for every dimension I created. However, as soon as the MVIEW joins more than one dimension table to the fact table the rewriting mechanism fails. It appears that the roll-up (aggregation along the hierarchy) is only possible for one of the dimensions. If the original query suggests rolling-up more than one dimension (e.g., "summarize the key figures by year and product category" but the underlying dimension is based on month and product), the MVIEW is no longer rewritten at all.
    Do you know this effect from your work experience? Is this a bug or have I made a mistake or forgotten to switch on a special feature?
    Here are some technical data of our data warehouse: we are running an Oracle Database 10g Enterprise Edition Release 10.2.0.4.0 on a Windows Server 2003, the size of the database is about 10 GB (excluding indexes), the star schema contains ten dimension tables each one with a simple or parallel hierarchies (e.g. a product dimension). The fact table and the MVIEWS are partitioned by month.
    Any help is very welcome.
    Regards,
    John

    Hi,
    you may ask with DBMS_MVIEW why your query does not get rewritten:
    Maybe you have to create a util table first with
    SQL> @?/rdbms/admin/utlxrw.sql
    Then you ask:
    SQL> begin
    DBMS_MVIEW.EXPLAIN_REWRITE('<your query without ; at the end>');
    end;
    The reason why it is not rewritten:
    SQL> select message from rewrite_table order by sequence;
    Kind regards
    Uwe

  • OBIEE Query not hitting the other fact table

    Hi All,
    I am trying to create report based on two fact column and one dimension. Dimension is connected with these two facts table. When i create report using one column from dimension and one column from respective facts so i get two scenerio...
    For example let say..
    D1 is dimension and F1 and F2 are two fact tables.
    First i used a column which have aggregation rule from one fact and one column from other fact which also have aggregate column.
    That is report like...
    D1.c1,Agg(F1.c2),Agg(F2.c3)
    When i run the report I get the data from dimension and only from first fact table. When i check the query, Query contain only one fact table and it doesnt hit the other one.
    Now in second scenerio i used one column from dimension, one column from first fact which have aggregation rule and one column from second fact which doesnt have any aggregation rule.
    like...
    D1.c1,Agg(F1.c2),F2.c3
    When i run the report i got the error. It says
    State: HY000. Code: 10058. [NQODBC] [SQL_STATE: HY000] [nQSError: 10058] A general error has occurred. [nQSError: 14026] Unable to navigate requested expression: F1 -C2 . Please fix the metadata consistency warnings. (HY000).
    But there is no warning in RPD.
    I am amazed that it is not taking both the fact columns even the dimension is confirmed dimension and have joined with both the fact tables.
    As i am just started to learn OBIEE, So i am find it bit difficult that how OBIEE select the tables and formed physical query.
    Waiting for your help.
    Regards
    Suhail

    Aadi-Wasi,
    Thumb rule, OBIEE BMM layer must contain a simple star schema.
    Did your BMM layer suffice the above condition? If hope, Not.
    My prediction of your BMM layer structure contains 3 logical tables, i.e. dimension & 2 logical facts...which is not a simple star.
    Thus to make it a simple star collapse 2 logical fact tables into 1 logical fact table. As you mentioned dimension is linked to both facts, collapsing 2 logical fact tables into 1 logical fact table will provide the result for your query1.
    regarding your second error:
    All aggregations must be contained within Fact tables with few exceptions.
    Let us know If I did resolve your issue
    mark posts promptly...
    J
    -bifacts
    http://www.obinotes.com

  • Multiple Fact Tables or Circular Joins?

    I'm using OE schema to build an rpd, I'm importing foreign keys and I'm unable to decide which tables to be joined additional to the imported foreign key joins. If I'm not making any new joins I'm getting multiple fact tables and if I do make some joins I'm getting circular joins, some one please throw some light on this.

    It is not a good idea to bring the OE schema tables as it is. The ideal approach would be to create a view that would represent the Fact table. For e.g this view could comprise of OE headers and OE line information and the reference id to the other dimensions.<br>
    <br>
    Similarly create views from customer table, item tables etc and then create a star schema surrounding the fact view with all these dimension views.<br>
    <br>
    -Nilesh<br>
    Dashboard Development

Maybe you are looking for

  • Cannot create a new account

    As long as I can not change my email address in my profile, I am trying to create a new profile with my new email address and It tells me that username is already in use. Perhaps I have registered before and I can not remember? I request a "password

  • Custom Exits

    Hi all, I have a requirement to create a report the compares a current year date range to the previous year - same date range. Does anyone have a code on how this can be done using an exit. Any Ideas will be welcome. Thank, PN

  • Changing project dims once they are set ?

    Hello, I'm wondering if it is possible to change the settings of a project once you have set it up, and have imported footage to the timeline ? I just set up a project, got all my footage on the timeline, and then realize that the project settings we

  • Binding with primitive datatypes

    Hello everybody, When I make a value binding expression with an Managed Bean attribute of type int and it doesn�t hold any special value, it�s initialized by default with 0 (as we would expect of course) But I don�t want that when the user try to reg

  • Large numeric field in a .csv file will not display

    A .csv file contains a numeric field which in some rows contains an 11-digit number (like 14024583126).  These will not display (blank or null).  Some of the rows contain numbers of 5-digits or 7-digits and these display fine.  How can I get the 11-d