10:1 rule for skip - level aggregation

Hy.
I'm new in OLAP. I'm using AWM on 10gR2 and could somebody explain to me what does mean 10:1 rule. I know that is ratio of children to parent level which is 10:1, but example that i study doesn't show me that.
Example:
(from Oracle 10g documentation, data warehousing, OLAP Application Developer's Guide, part 7 Aggregating Data, Case Study: Aggregating a Moderately Sparse or Dense Cube)
SELECT COUNT(DISTINCT ship_to_id), COUNT(DISTINCT warehouse_id),
COUNT(DISTINCT region_id),COUNT(DISTINCT total_customer_id),
COUNT(DISTINCT account_id), COUNT(DISTINCT market_segment_id),
COUNT(DISTINCT total_market_id), FROM global.customer_dim;
Global is a very small data set, so few adjacent levels have the desired 10:1 ratio of children-to-parent dimension members. Table 7-4 and Table 7-5 identify the appropriate levels to be calculated and stored for the two hierarchies. Only eight members are stored out of a total of 45 aggregate members.
On the Summarize To page for the Units Cube, select the precalculated levels for Customer, and select all levels for Time, Product, and Channel.
Table 7-4 Precalculated Levels in the Customer Shipments Hierarchy
Level Members Precalculate?
Total_Customer 1 No
Regio 3 Yes
Warehouse 11 No
Ship_To 61 Yes
Level Members Precalculate?
Total_Market 1 No
Market_Segment 5 Yes
Account 24 No
Ship_To 61 Yes
If I use rule 10:1 child to parent member why Warehouse and Account doesn't have precalculate set to Yes If they have 10 or more child values below.
Please help!!!!

It is a long time since I used the global schema and at the moment I am using the BI common schema so I am trying to quote from memory here regarding the data. The figures you have outlined below are number of members at each level, a better calculation would be the average number of children that would be returned when drilling from one level to the next. In this case there are 3 regions and 11 warehouses, so drilling from region to warehouse is likely to return at most 4 warehouses on average.
To quote from the OLAP documentation:
This 10:1 rule is best applied with some judgment. You might want to permit a higher
ratio for levels that you know are seldom accessed. Or you might want to store levels
at a lower ratio if you know they have heavy use.
The key for pre-aggregation is understanding expected usage patterns of your users. In this case for the global schema I expect it is optimised for demo purposes and the levels that are precomputed are those most likely to be used in a demo.
In your case you need to understand where your users will most likely start there analysis and make sure that combination of levels is precomputed to ensure fast response times for the first query and then monitor usage patterns and get feedback from users over time.
If you are using Discoverer OLAP Plus client you could export the Discoverer catalog and analyse the XML for each report to determine which values are being created. I don't think there is an easy way to monitor OLAP queries at the moment (I could be wrong but I have not seen anything in Enterprise Manager that would help in this area). You could quickly create a program in PL/SQL or OLAP DML that would help analyse the XML for Disco reports. If you are using BI Beans you can scan the XML from the BI Beans catalog for each report.
For the OLAP Spreadsheet Addin it might be necessary to create a program to scan the $V_SQL/V$SESSION tables to work out which data points are being requested by users.
Of course you could just try pre-computing every other level which I think was/is the default aggregation plan generated by OWB and AWM.
Hope this helps
Keith

Similar Messages

  • Aggregation plan/Skip level aggregation for model with a cumulative measure

    I have planning data in the following format.
    Project     Department Name     Task     Date          Units of work completed
    PRO1     DEPARTMENT1          Task1     01/01/2008     12
    PRO1     DEPARTMENT1          Task1     01/21/2008     3
    PRO1     DEPARTMENT1          Task1     03/01/2008     8
    PRO1     DEPARTMENT1          Task1               4
    PRO1     DEPARTMENT1          Task2     01/21/2008     5
    PRO1     DEPARTMENT1          Task2               9
    PRO1     DEPARTMENT2          Task1     01/01/2008     20
    PRO1     DEPARTMENT2          Task1     02/11/2008     6
    PRO1     DEPARTMENT2          Task3     01/15/2008     15
    Note: The rows having blank dates indicate remaining work for that task
    Based on user requirements, I have created a OLAP model as follows
    Dimensions:
    1. All Projects-->Projects
    2. All Department-->Department
    3. All Tasks     --> Tasks
    4. Year-->Month-->Day
    Measures:
    1. Total units of work (Irrespective of date)
    2. Cumulative units of work completed (Based on the date)
    If someone has worked on similar models before, I would be thankful if they can help me with
    1) An aggregation plan for these measures. (Basically, for my first measure, I would want to get a cumulative total across my time dimension, and for my other measure, I would like to see the total units, whatever date I pick, for example, for Dep1, Task1, this measure should show 27 on 01/01/08 and also on 01/21/08 and also when I roll up and look at year 2008, I still need 27 in this column)
    2) Is it ok to apply Skip level aggregation to this type of calculations, or would that result in some problems?
    Any and All suggestions to implement this are welcome.
    Thanks,
    Bharat

    Hi,
    Can you build time dimension to include as many years as your application needs (2000 to 2025 say)? Then you can simplify the model a lot by defaulting the records with remaining units -- the ones with no date -- with the last date in your time dimension (31-DEC-2025). So in a sense, you're loading them as if they'll be complete on 31-DEC-2025.
    Also you should have a grand total level (ALL_YEARS say) along time dimension which contains a single member which includes all the years.
    Cube with 3 dimensions: Projects, Dept, Task, Time and 1 Fact: Units
    You can use calculated measures to get the results you want
    1. Total units of work (Irrespective of date) ... reference top most member. Will include all -- completed and incomplete units of work.
    Expression: cube1_units(time 'ALL_YEARS_1').. or use olap dml function to get the last member programatically if desired... Alternate Expression: cube1_units(time limit(time to time_levelrel eq 'ALL_YEARS')).
    2. Cumulative units of work completed (Based on the date)
    2a: Create formula/measure which is a regular Cumulative summation of Units .... Note: you need a Period-To-Date calculation set to sum up all peers under ancestor at level: ALL_YEARS (instead of year)
    This will include all completed units until the day in question. Since incomplete units are on the last day, they will not count.. You may need to add a special check for the last day.
    Use another formula to reference 2a appropriately across all levels of time...
    Formula for Measure #2: if time_levelrel eq 'DAY' then 2a else 2a(time statlast(limit(time to bottomdescendants using time_parentrel time(time time))))
    For higher levels of time (above day), you should reference the Cumulative units of work for the last day of the relevant period. E.g. To get completed units of work for October 2011, you need to reference the value of 2a. for last day of the Month: 31-Oct-2011.
    HTH
    Shankar

  • 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

  • Skip Level Dimensions

    Dear all
    We have a client with an interesting problem. I was wondering if the group could offer any feedback on this design question, where we think it involves a concept called 'skip levels'. The client is using Oracle 9.0.2 with their data mart cube held as ROLAP. Our first thoughts are that what they want to do is better served by using a true OLAP tool such as Oracle Express, or Oracle 9i OLAP, which deals with skip level dimensions easier. Anyway, here's the problem :
    "For our warehouse project, we need some dimensions (initially: account, company) that use a skip level hierarchy. This means that the lowest level dimensions are of the same level (G/L account or company) and they need to roll up in a structure of varying levels, before they come together again in a highest level.
    Ideally, we would like to use a data structure that can be used transparently by the user and allows for rollups of amounts through the dimension. We would like to be able to populate the dimension through OWB and to query the data using both Crystal reports v9 and BI beans and possibly other tools that recognize the Oracle data warehouse concept.
    The two solutions we are aware of are:
    1.     Insert Dummy levels:
    This is not a nice solution but is will work and it is simple.
    2.     Insert a helper table that contains the higher level account with all the children (as per Ralph Kimball)
    This seems a cumbersome solution but I am sure it would work also. The question is how the Oracle's BI beans and the CWM2 metadata would recognize this and how we can make this transparent to the user.
    I am sure there are other solutions to the problem. It seems like the problem would be solved by the next release of Oracle (9.0.3?), which allows us to deal with skip level hierarchies through CWM2 (which I believe this is). The solution we choose should also allow us to easily upgrade to the new skip level hierarchy, which I would expect to be easier to use then the above."
    The main thing to bear in mind here is that they want to implement a ROLAP solution, using Oracle 9i tables, dimensions and heirarchies. It also has to work with Oracle Warehouse Builder, take advantage of the CWM2 metadata (if possible) and work with the BI Beans.
    Any thoughts on this? Does anyone know how Oracle are going to cater for skip-level dimensions with the next release? Is this through the improved support for the CWM2 metadata standard for ROLAP cubes, or is the customer best of going to the true OLAP 'Analytic Workspace'? If we ignore a MOLAP solution, what's the best way of dealing with this, in such a manner that it's transparent to query tools, and isn't too much of a 'hack'?
    Many thanks in advance,
    Mark Rittman
    Mark Rittman
    Consulting Manager, Plus Consultancy
    [email protected]
    [email protected]--------------

    As part of my search i've uncovered an article by Ralph Kimball on using 'helper tables' to deal with ragged hierarchies.
    http://www.dbmsmag.com/9809d05.html
    This advocates using a table between the fact table and the dimension. Quoting from Mr. Kimball;
    "You can solve this modeling problem by inserting a helper table between the dimension table and the fact table, as shown in Figure 3 (http://www.dbmsmag.com/9809d05.html#fig3). Amazingly enough, you don't have to make any changes to either the dimension table or the fact table; you just rip the join apart and insert the helper table.
    The helper table contains one record for each separate path from each node in the organization tree to itself and to every node below it. There are, then, more records in the helper table than there are nodes in the tree. In Figure 3 we need a total of 43 records in the helper table. See if you can work this out.
    Each record in the helper table contains the fields:
    - Parent Customer Key
    - Subsidiary Customer Key
    - Depth From Parent
    - Lowest Flag
    - Topmost Flag.
    If you are descending the tree from certain selected parents to various subsidiaries, you join the dimension table to the helper table and the helper table to the fact table with the joins as shown in Figure 3. The Depth From Parent field counts how many levels the subsidiary is below the parent. The Lowest Flag field is True only if the subsidiary has no further nodes beneath it. The Topmost Flag field is True only if the parent has no further nodes above it.
    The beauty of this design is that you can place any normal dimensional constraint against the Customer dimension table and the helper table will cause all the fact table records for the directly constrained customers plus all their subsidiaries to be correctly summarized. In other words, you can use your standard relational databases and your standard query tools to analyze the hierarchical structure."
    My question is - has anyone tried to implement this with OWB, or with the Oracle ROLAP data warehouse in general, reporting through Discoverer or BI Beans? Any opinions?
    thanks
    Mark

  • ROLAP skip level dimension support - CWM2?

    Dear all
    We have a client with an interesting problem. I was wondering if the group could offer any feedback on this design question, where we think it involves a concept called 'skip levels'. The client is using Oracle 9.0.2 with their data mart cube held as ROLAP. Our first thoughts are that what they want to do is better served by using a true OLAP tool such as Oracle Express, or Oracle 9i OLAP, which deals with skip level dimensions easier. Anyway, here's the problem :
    "For our warehouse project, we need some dimensions (initially: account, company) that use a skip level hierarchy. This means that the lowest level dimensions are of the same level (G/L account or company) and they need to roll up in a structure of varying levels, before they come together again in a highest level.
    Ideally, we would like to use a data structure that can be used transparently by the user and allows for rollups of amounts through the dimension. We would like to be able to populate the dimension through OWB and to query the data using both Crystal reports v9 and BI beans and possibly other tools that recognize the Oracle data warehouse concept.
    The two solutions we are aware of are:
    1.     Insert Dummy levels:
    This is not a nice solution but is will work and it is simple.
    2.     Insert a helper table that contains the higher level account with all the children (as per Ralph Kimball)
    This seems a cumbersome solution but I am sure it would work also. The question is how the Oracle's BI beans and the CWM2 metadata would recognize this and how we can make this transparent to the user.
    I am sure there are other solutions to the problem. It seems like the problem would be solved by the next release of Oracle (9.0.3?), which allows us to deal with skip level hierarchies through CWM2 (which I believe this is). The solution we choose should also allow us to easily upgrade to the new skip level hierarchy, which I would expect to be easier to use then the above."
    The main thing to bear in mind here is that they want to implement a ROLAP solution, using Oracle 9i tables, dimensions and heirarchies. It also has to work with Oracle Warehouse Builder, take advantage of the CWM2 metadata (if possible) and work with the BI Beans.
    Any thoughts on this? Does anyone know how Oracle are going to cater for skip-level dimensions with the next release? Is this through the improved support for the CWM2 metadata standard for ROLAP cubes, or is the customer best of going to the true OLAP 'Analytic Workspace'? If we ignore a MOLAP solution, what's the best way of dealing with this, in such a manner that it's transparent to query tools, and isn't too much of a 'hack'?
    Many thanks in advance,
    Mark Rittman
    Mark Rittman
    Consulting Manager, Plus Consultancy
    [email protected]
    [email protected]--------------

    Dear all
    We have a client with an interesting problem. I was wondering if the group could offer any feedback on this design question, where we think it involves a concept called 'skip levels'. The client is using Oracle 9.0.2 with their data mart cube held as ROLAP. Our first thoughts are that what they want to do is better served by using a true OLAP tool such as Oracle Express, or Oracle 9i OLAP, which deals with skip level dimensions easier. Anyway, here's the problem :
    "For our warehouse project, we need some dimensions (initially: account, company) that use a skip level hierarchy. This means that the lowest level dimensions are of the same level (G/L account or company) and they need to roll up in a structure of varying levels, before they come together again in a highest level.
    Ideally, we would like to use a data structure that can be used transparently by the user and allows for rollups of amounts through the dimension. We would like to be able to populate the dimension through OWB and to query the data using both Crystal reports v9 and BI beans and possibly other tools that recognize the Oracle data warehouse concept.
    The two solutions we are aware of are:
    1.     Insert Dummy levels:
    This is not a nice solution but is will work and it is simple.
    2.     Insert a helper table that contains the higher level account with all the children (as per Ralph Kimball)
    This seems a cumbersome solution but I am sure it would work also. The question is how the Oracle's BI beans and the CWM2 metadata would recognize this and how we can make this transparent to the user.
    I am sure there are other solutions to the problem. It seems like the problem would be solved by the next release of Oracle (9.0.3?), which allows us to deal with skip level hierarchies through CWM2 (which I believe this is). The solution we choose should also allow us to easily upgrade to the new skip level hierarchy, which I would expect to be easier to use then the above."
    The main thing to bear in mind here is that they want to implement a ROLAP solution, using Oracle 9i tables, dimensions and heirarchies. It also has to work with Oracle Warehouse Builder, take advantage of the CWM2 metadata (if possible) and work with the BI Beans.
    Any thoughts on this? Does anyone know how Oracle are going to cater for skip-level dimensions with the next release? Is this through the improved support for the CWM2 metadata standard for ROLAP cubes, or is the customer best of going to the true OLAP 'Analytic Workspace'? If we ignore a MOLAP solution, what's the best way of dealing with this, in such a manner that it's transparent to query tools, and isn't too much of a 'hack'?
    Many thanks in advance,
    Mark Rittman
    Mark Rittman
    Consulting Manager, Plus Consultancy
    [email protected]
    [email protected]--------------

  • 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?

  • Aggregation rules for calculations

    Hi
    I have a calculation (logical column) Z as X*Y and I want Z to be an average at different levels in hierachy. How do I do it in OBIEE?

    Hi Siddharth,
    Specifying Aggregation rule for a column in Admin Tool and applying Formula for a column in Answers work differently.
    We usually specify Aggregation rule in Admin tool to implement the calculation measures. So, it will be used along with the logical levels.
    Where as specifying Formula for a column in Answers works for that particular Request only..
    Comes to its Significance...
    Take the general example... Sales by Country, Region, District and City
    To calculate the total sales Country, Region, District and City wise we specify aggregation rule as SUM for the Amount column..
    In order to calculate the logical level wise details we use Aggregations..i.e., Measures..
    For last question, is your saying the use of 'Use Existing Logical columns as the Source'..
    In this case, I think it is not possible to specify the Aggregation rule in Admin tool.
    -Vency

  • 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

  • Settlemnent rule for Non-Billable WBS at Level 2 .

    Hi Folks,
    We have the Finance related WBS at Level 2 one is billable & other is non billable WBS . As per the recommendation of SAP , we are generating the automatic settlement rule for Billable WBS at level 2 & all the below WBS ( which are non-billable ) & account assigned as Do not settle. ( settlemnet rule 90) .
    This issue is creating a issue to the non billable WBS at level 2 created wherein we are not able to settlement due to the strategy followed as Do not settle ( Rule 90 ) for the Account assigned WBS element.
    Is there any way we can settle the costs posted to the non-billable level 2 WBS to the reciever ?
    Your advice to this issue will be helpful.
    Thanks in advance.
    Ramu

    You can settle the cost of Non-billable WBSE to billable WBSE. and then from billable WBSE settle the cost to other reciever. for this to happen, you have to delete the settlement rule "do not settle" in non-billabe WBSE and write a settlement rule which settles to billable WBSE.

  • Setting aggregation content for logical level in 11g

    Hi Guys,
    When working on with horizontal and vertical federation in OBIEE 11g with multiple data sources here in my case it is essbase and RDBMS.
    1) pulled the columns and dragged into the concerened table.
    2) The related heirarchies have been defined.
    3) when trying to go to one of the LTS and trying to set the logical level aggregation im not able to see the levels columns corresponding nor im getting the get levels option to get them. where am i going wrong?
    when im trying to join a fact by pulling it on to the fact...i can see the levels in content tab,but when i try to define levels and check it its giving me error "There are no levels matching the BI algorithm"
    Any answers wud be appreciated.
    TIA,
    KK
    Edited by: Kranthi.K on Sep 5, 2011 2:52 AM

    It is autocreated,i dint customize it.....Im dropping the RDBMS table onto the Essbase cube dimension table and im not getting the RDBMS content levels that should be defined in the LTS of the table,and the RDBMS table has an level based hierarchy but still no sucess.
    Any more ideas
    UPDATED POST
    Deepak,it was not helpful as i have gone through tht document before....Im trying it in all scenerios to figure out where actually it is going wrong.
    If i dont find the path,i will let you kne what im trying to do so you can help me out.
    UPDATED POST-2
    Any more pointers from the experts.
    Edited by: Kranthi.K on Sep 6, 2011 7:01 AM

  • How to Skip weight data from Sales order for Higher level BOM material

    I have maintained a BOM at Item level with item category group LUMF.
    And the higher level item is not subjected for pricing and costing. While creating the higher level Item I did not maintain weight for it. Now when I create a sales order due to the incompletion log system is asking to maintain Weight details for higher level item also.
    But I donu2019t want to maintain weight for that item nor I want to remove net weight and gross wt from incompletion log.
    While creating higher level material with material type FERT and I have maintained LUMF and all things are normal. Also tell me do I need to select any different material type or do I need to go for different settings ?
    I hope my query is clear. Please ask if query is not clear.
    Please Guruu2019s suggest me.

    Hi ,
    I do not know what a reference charactersitcs is,but there are all independant characeristics in terms of their values.
    A guess it is because the VC data is changed after the sales order is created, the updated VC data is displayed properly only in VA02 or VA03 but other function modules fail to display the updated VC data.
    I understand there is a relationship of instance -between sales order object and VC data object-which we need to update and then see the latest data.
    Please let me know if anyone has debgged VA03 to know how the standard SAP program retrieves VC data in a sales order.
    Thank you,
    Hemant

  • How to create a custom measure for each level of a dimension

    Hi all!
    Can Anyone please explain me with an example, how to create a custom measure for each level for a dimension? I dont mine if you use
    one or more measures.
    thanks in advance
    hope someone helps me.

    For example:I create a dimension for product_dim witch has 4 levels:total, class, family and item:
    d_aben18
    n1_aben18
    n2_aben18
    n3_aben18
    n4_aben18
    herarchy:h_aben18
    cube:cubo_aben18
    measure:med_aben18
    I create this code to fetch the data to the dimension:
    TRAP ON CLEANUP
    SQL DECLARE c1 CURSOR FOR SELECT-
    total_product_id,1,'N1_ABEN18',total_product_dsc,-
    class_id,1,'N2_ABEN18',total_product_id,class_dsc,-
    family_id,1,'N3_ABEN18', class_id, family_dsc,-
    item_id,1,'N4_ABEN18',family_id,item_dsc-
    FROM PRODUCT_DIM
    "OPEN THE CURSOR
    SQL OPEN c1
    "FETCH THE DATA
    SQL FETCH c1 LOOP INTO-
    :APPEND D_ABEN18, :D_ABEN18_H_aben18_HIERDEF,:D_ABEN18_N1_aben18_LEVELDEF,:D_ABEN18_long_description,-
    :APPEND D_ABEN18, :D_ABEN18_H_aben18_HIERDEF,:D_ABEN18_N2_aben18_LEVELDEF,:D_ABEN18_parentrel,-
    :D_ABEN18_long_description,-
    :APPEND D_ABEN18, :D_ABEN18_H_aben18_HIERDEF,:D_ABEN18_N3_aben18_LEVELDEF,:D_ABEN18_parentrel,-
    :D_ABEN18_long_description,-
    :APPEND D_ABEN18, :D_ABEN18_H_aben18_HIERDEF,:D_ABEN18_N4_aben18_LEVELDEF,:D_ABEN18_parentrel,-
    :D_ABEN18_long_description,-
    "SAVE THE CHANGES
    UPDATE
    COMMIT
    CLEANUP:
    SQL CLOSE c1
    SHOW 'KK2'
    Then I create a cube with use compression off, and in rules sum for example.
    After, I create a measure and I select Override the aggregation specification for the cube, in rules I put nonadditive and I would like to create aprogram to assign distinct values to each level of the dimension. For example, I put 1, 2 3, and 4 values, but at the end I would like to put count(distinct(values)).
    for that I create another program:
    VRB D_RETURN DECIMAL
    if D_ABEN18_N1_ABEN18_LEVELDEF eq 'N1_ABEN18'
    then D_RETURN = 1
    if D_ABEN18_N2_ABEN18_LEVELDEF eq 'N2_ABEN18'
    then D_RETURN = 2
    if D_ABEN18_N3_ABEN18_LEVELDEF eq 'N3_ABEN18'
    then D_RETURN = 3
    if D_ABEN18_N4_ABEN18_LEVELDEF eq 'N4_ABEN18'
    then D_RETURN = 4
    else d_return=26
    return d_return
    "SHOW D_RETURN
    cubo_aben18_med_aben18_stored=d_return
    but it doesnt work.I dont know how to put to assign or to see what I want.
    I report the measure, or I report the program, but then how can I see the values of the measure?
    thanks in advance

  • Dynamic Modification Rule (At Lot Level) In Quality

    Dear All
    Please explain me in detail how to use Dynamic Modification Rule (At Lot Level) In quality Module.
    Thanks & Regards
    Rahul Bhardwaj

    Dear,
    In material master under (QM view) active "Skip allow"  indicator.
    Skip lotting in SAP is some what different. SAP does not actual prevent the creation of the inspection lot. It simply sets a status of SKIP on the inspection lot. The lot is still there and if desired, it can be used. Once a characteristic is accessed in the lot, it becomes a normal inspection lot.
    You need to setup an auto UD batch job for processing the skip lots and closing them. Skip lots have their own "wait" time defined in plant QM config settings.
    That means by DMR you can not stop the inspection lot generation.
    Hope clear to you.
    Regards,
    R.Brahmankar

  • DMR - stock posting for skip lot

    hi experts,
    i am creating a DMR for raw material GR gainst PO.
    I am creating DMR at lot level. i will inspect first batch an skip next 5 batches.
    after executing i am getting 6 inpsection lots with first as normal inspection lot and next 5 in skip status.
    now the query is in one system after GR of PO i am getting the skip lot  stock in quality and in other system (other client) .
    i am getting the skip lot stock directly in unrestricted use. both have inspection lots status REL SKIP.
    dmr RULE is same , material master inspection type settings are same.
    what is standard SAP function shud the stock go to quality or untrestristed for skip lot ?
    what might be reason for this different behaviour ? any function module or user exit  is used?
    anything i need to look in config.?
    Thanks
    satish

    Bit late but maybe other people find this a helpful answer.....
    Check the inspection lot control settings in the material master.
    If option For each material document item is chosen, the skiplot goes to unrestricted stock.
    If option For each material document, batch and storage location is chosen, the skiplot goes to quality stock.
    BR,
    Arno

  • Advices & rules for package hierarchy

    Hi,
    I developing a new project and I'll use packages for the first time. (My company doesn't have rules for package)
    I would like to know the gereral rules for creating a good hierarchy.
    i'm thinking of something like:
    com.mycompany.myproject.form
    com.mycompany.myproject.dialog
    com.mycompany.myproject.sql
    com.mycompany.myproject.dataobjects
    com.mycompany.myproject.table
    com.mycompany.myproject.tree
    Should I use also packages like com.mycompany.table for generals stuff like table models that could be of use for others projects ?
    Is this a good idea ? Do you have any suggestions ?

    I am not aware of any hard and fast rules for packaging. There are some things I keep in mind when I setup hierarchies though:
    1) The "standard" (more common than standard) is your businesses internet address reversed. So for instance, if you are www.foo.com, your packages would start out with "com.foo". Some people leave off the "com" part as well, so you would have "foo". I don't like this however as more and more companies reserve "*.net" and "*.com" and "*.org" etc addresses. Leave the top level domain on there. This is mostly just for namespace sake, so you don't get two pieces of code from two different companies with the same name.
    2) Is this the only product your company produces? OR will this be the only product your company produces? If the answer is no, you may want to put the product name next, so now we have "com.foo.product1". This will allow you to build nice, clash safe hierarchies.
    3) Most products are broken down into a number of projects or modules. Sometimes its a good idea to divide the package structure with this information. So now we have "com.foo.product1.module1", "com.foo.product1.module2" etc.
    4) If its an enterprise application (multitiered, J2EE, etc), I personally like to divide the code into tiers. It makes building easier and packaging for deployment much more intuitive. You might have web tier code, database tier code, application tier code, code common to all tiers etc. So now we have "com.foo.product1.module1.app" and "com.foo.product1.module1.web", etc. If its not an enterprise multi-tiered application, skip this step.
    5) Now within the hierarchy we have built up, its pretty much up to you to logically divide your code.
    6) It is now possible to "push" code up to certain levels to make it available to other projects/products/tiers. If you develop a nice data structure that you think might be useful to other products your company is developing, move the data structure up to an appropriate level to make it available to all products. For instance, "com.foo.structures.AwesomeStructure", instead of "com.foo.product1.structures.AwesomeStructure".
    7) Products and projects should not import outside of their "scope". This prevents cross project dependency and cross product dependency. If another project or product needs to import something outside its scope then the code should be moved to a more common place to make it available.
    Some will call this overly anal, but it has worked well for me for a few years. Hopefully others can provide you with more tips.
    Hope this helps.

Maybe you are looking for