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

Similar Messages

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

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

Edit formula Aggregation rule?

What is the aggregation rule meant in formula tab?
What happen if I give aggregation rule in formula tab?
Will the aggregation rule in formula tab overwrite the predefined aggregation rule in UI/Repository?
If I want to change the aggregation rule only to the grand total where to specify?
Can I give two different aggregation rules each one for values and grand total respectively?
If I give aggregation rule “Default” in Formula tab what will happen?
If I give aggregation rule “None” in Formula tab what will happen?

Check the below link, the same can also get from Help link in Answers
All the aggregation functions are top of what you defined in the RPD, Aggregation rules in Answers will not override RPD aggregation rules, since RPD is base for Answers
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E12096_01/books/AnyUser/formulaeditor.html#wp1096420

Answers and Aggregation rules not working

Hi everyone!
I have this problem: in my repository I set "none" in the aggregation rule for a field... but if I try to make aggregations in the answer (with the dropdown list in "Edit formula") they don't work at all, I always get the same result even if I change from default to sum to average to count...
Is it a bug? Does anyone have any workaround?
P.S.: if I use the function sum(...) in the formula it works... but I'd like to use the aggregation rule's combo box!
Thanks so and.. have an happy new year!
DrPlexi

The aggreagation in answers is for the summary of the results ( that is when you use ∑)

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?

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.

Different Aggregation rule while aggregating

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

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

Default Aggregation Rule

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

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

Aggreation Based on Dimensions - Aggregation rule: Evaluate_Aggr

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

Exposing business rules as web services in 11g

Hi all,
I have deployed my business rules in Enterprise Manager, but the test button is disabled and I'm getting the next message: "In Enterprise Manager only can be tested composites that are exposed as web services". Does anybody knows how can I do that?

There are a couple of ways you can do it.
1. Drag a Web Service Adapter in the 'Exposed Services' panel in your composite and during configuration choose the WSDL of the Decision service i.e Rules. This will expose the rules as a web service if not already.
2. Double Click on the Reference icon on the Decision Service component (small rounded blue arrow). An Update Interface window will pop up. Check box 'Create Composite Service with soap binding' and select the appropriate port type from the available list.
You can now invoke your rule as web services and even test them from the EM console

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?

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

Can we expose aggregation rule in answers?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for