10G aggregation  rule confusion

I am confusing aggregation rule in pivot table view. What dose it control? Grand total or all the columns value?
For example:
When I drag Year, Month, Sales columns into the criteria area and make use of pivot table to generate report , I use aggregation rule "Count" for sales, then click Grand total button to see the result ,the result will be correct. However, when I create new pivot view named pivot 2 based on these columns and drag "Month" into the exclude area, then select "Count" rule to view the data, you can find all the columns that be counted. Why?
Pivot 1:
Year ----Month ----Sales
2011-----201101---100
2011-----201102---200
2012----201201-----300
2012----201202-----400
Grand total-----------4
Pivot2:
Year----Sales
2011-----2
2012-----2
Grand------4

Hi Kobe,
check this for purpose of Aggregation rule in the Pivot table.
http://obiee101.blogspot.com/2009/01/obiee-creating-yamazumi-graph.html

Similar Messages

  • 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

  • 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 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.

  • Direct Database Request Aggregation Rule

    How can I do aggregations on a report created with a direct database request? While I can set the default aggregation rule in the fx formula, the aggregate E sign does not appear in the table view. How do I actually get to do a summation of the column?
    Thanks,
    Dinesh.

    I guess I celebrated too soon. Now I lost the ability to display Columns & Table headings as separate rows. How can I accomplish the grouping of different columns under headings the way I accomplished with 'Columns & Table headings' as separate rows?
    Thanks,
    Dinesh.

  • 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

  • Aggregation rule in Logical table source

    hi all,
    please help me about aggregation rule in logical table source. why,when and how they are used.
    thank you.
    Regards,
    Imtiaz
    BI Trainee.

    Check page no 115, for explanation
    http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E10415_01/doc/bi.1013/b31770.pdf
    save this PDF file, as it helps you in understanding every thing related to RPD developement.

  • 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

    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.

  • Which Aggregation Rule to be followed?

    I have a logical Fact table A with logical table sources B,C,D
    B,C are Dimension and D is the Fact.
    And they are joined as follows Dim B---> Dim C---->Fact D
    So whenever i choose a metric from the Fact D its has to compulsorily go through these joins
    I have a metric in D which is having the aggregation rule as count(Distinct()). While generating the reports the SQL issued does not have the Join till Dim B, it does a Count(Distinct()) till the Fact itself.
    Now when I change the Aggregation To Sum/Avg the issued SQL is till the Dim B.
    But my requirement is that I have to do a Count(Distinct()) and my SQL issued properly gets joined till Dim B

    Suppress your join in the logical table source from the Fact A (with B and C)
    and follow this procedures to create measures from dimension :
    http://gerardnico.com/wiki/dat/obiee/bi_server/design/fact_table/obiee_measures_dimension
    Which kind of measures do you have in the dimension B and C, I'm a little bit curious ... Can you tell more about the data ?
    Success
    Nico

  • 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

  • Difference between aggregation rule and column formula in edit formula

    Anybody please help what is the use of aggregation rule and column formula in edit column option.
    What is the difference if I apply sum in aggregation rule with apply sum(column name) in column formula.
    When do I need use which one.
    Thanks in advance

    When you build a column in the rpd, you have the option of determining if the column should be aggregated in some way or not. For dimension columns, you wouldn't put aggregation. For say, an accoun ledger balance column, you might put the aggregation SUM or AVERAGE. Whatever aggregation you put on this column will be the "default" aggregation of the column in Answers.
    So in Answerrs, if you use the Account Ledger Balance column and you only have Region as the dimension, OBIEE will aggregate or SUM the ledger balances so you have a SUM for the region level. If you had district, than the ledger balance column will aggregate to the district level. This is a convenient way to build reports without having to specify what the aggregation should be.
    However, OBIEE gives you the ability to override what the default aggregation is for a particular column. This is the purpose of the drop down in the bottom left of a column when you click the fx button.
    Say the default aggregation of ledger balance is SUM in the rpd, but for the report you are building, you want the average, you can apply the AVERAGE function in the fx window and it will overridge the SUM aggregation rule that was in the rpd.
    Got it?

  • Can we expose aggregation rule in answers?

    Hi All,
    Can we expose aggregation rule in answers?
    that is if have a measure 'Sales' whose Aggregation defined in BMM layer is 'Sum'.
    is it possible if we bring this measure column in Answers which gives me its aggregation defined in BMM layer.
    Regrads,
    Som

    Somu, i dont think there is automated way for doing this dynamically.
    the descriptions defined in the Business Model will come as hover text for that column in presentation area. If you put aggregation detail in that column description, then you can see that if you put mouse over on that particular column in answers.
    or create a new column in the report and put the text when ever needed. :-)
    - Madan

  • EDIT AGGREGATION RULE IN ANSWER FOR A MEASURE

    Hello Experts,
    I have a measure in my fact table which is a "price" and I don't want to set up a default aggregation (sum, avg, max, min...etc) in my Business Model (Administrator). I want the user to be able to set an "Aggregation Rule" in Answers to that measure.
    So, I go into Answer, select my measure from my model and then click on Edit formula and change the Aggregation Rule to "Avg" this seems to don't work.
    I think I'm missing something, a setting or option.
    I'll appreciate if you guys can help me with this...thanks.

    Hey mma,
    I'm referring to the "Edit Column Formula" option and then I click on "Column Formula". At the bottom of that tag there is a section that says "Aggregation Rule" with a drop down box that shows; Avg, Max, Min...etc. Thats where I make the change to "Avg" and it doesn't work.
    Edited by: PabloC2 on Sep 18, 2008 3:57 PM

Maybe you are looking for