Complex Data Modelling

Hi Experts,
I am struck in the data modelling in RPD for the below scenerio.
I have D1,D2,D3,D4 and F1.
1)D1 is one to many D2
2)D2 is many to one D3
3)D3 is one to many D4
4)Finally D4 is one to many F1
Now i need data at D1 and D3 Level but i m confused to build hierarchies and all and how to summed up the data at D1 and D3 Level.
Any help is appreciated.
Edited by: user11204020 on Feb 7, 2013 9:09 PM

Join them in physical layer as you mentioned or as below
D1->D2<-D3->D4->F1
In BMM layer Pull F1 and D4 together and then D4 Source properties->General tab-> Look for Add button (10g) or Map (11g)
Add remaining 3 tables.
Once you done that, pull required columns from 3 tables from physical layer to D4 logical table
If this is not working? send me rpd file to my email
If helps pls mark

Similar Messages

Many pages and complex data model in JHS app

I am using JHS to create an application containing data that is structured something like:
- Country
- Company
- Department
- Employee
- Payments Details
I have created entity and view objects corresponding to each of these and the appropriate accessors/view links. We need the user to be able to search, work on data and 'drill down' from any level (not always starting with company). In order to make this possible my JHS application has 5 'top level' tabs corresponding to each of the above entities. From each of these top level pages users can drill down to the children.
This works but we end up with many pages and a large data model with lots of replication and nesting.
Country - 5 pages
Company - 4 pages
Department - 3 pages
Employee - 2 pages
Payments - 1 page
total 15
You can picture how the data model is structured. Obviously this is a very simple example but I hope it illustrates my concerns. We have so many pages that post-generation changes are going to be difficult to manage. I'm also worried about the size and complexity of the data model. In this case views are almost all entity based so I guess the data is only cached once but supposing they were not?
Are we using JHS in the best way ? perhaps I'm overcompilcating it ?
I have started to rewrite the JHS generated application so that it (almost) always reuses the same top level generated pages (with some modifications). When the user wants to navigate to a child I modify the whereClause of the target ViewOjbect appropriately, reexecute it and forward to the corresponding 'top level' page. This approach seems to work well, cuts down the number of pages enormously and simplifies the data model (and has enabled me to put breadCrumbs in).
In doing this though, am I creating work for myself that JSH could have done if we had used it differently in the fist place?

This sounds like a valid approach in your situation. We have been playing with the idea of having something like 'Group Links' where you can generate navigation items from one group to the other. Then, you would need to have one, 5 level deep nested group, and 4 other top level groups to provide the search&select on each of the nested groups, but they themselves would not need to have nested groups, but a navigation link to the nested groups in the 5-level deep group.
Although nice and simple in theory, the details are a bit tricky to work out with all the possible layout- and samePage settings, so we have not implemented this yet. So your approach seems a valid one. If you have any suggestions on a way to generate what you are now doing manually, we'll be interested.
Kind regards,
Peter Ebell
JHeadstart Team

Complex data model question regarding master data

Hi Experts,
I have a requirement to add master data retail price and master data cost into BW.
Both amounts are based on plant and material. How do I model this?
Here is how the records are coming in via the datasource:
Plant   Material      UofM Cost    CostFrom CostTo Retail   RetailFrom RetailTo
0001   1000321      EA    $1.00   5/1/07   5/9/07     $2.99    6/6/07        6/9/07
0001   1000321      CS    $8.00   5/5/07   5/7/07     $9.99    8/6/07        9/9/07
Here's what I am thinking....
1. Add UofM, Cost, and Retail prices as attributes of 0MAT_PLANT infoObject
    Also make those attributes time dependent.
2. Use ABAP slit up the cost info and the retail info and use the valid dates above for the time dependent from/to dates in 0MAT_PLANT
Example:
0MAT_PLANT attributes:
Plant   Material      UofM Cost    ValidityFrom ValidityTo    Retail
0001   1000321      EA    $1.00   5/1/07          5/9/07
0001   1000321      CS    $8.00   5/5/07          5/7/07
0001   1000321      EA               6/6/07          6/9/07         $2.99
0001   1000321      CS               8/6/07          9/9/07         $9.99
After looking at the above, I need to compound UofM with 0MAT_PLANT somehow. How would I do that?
Is this the best way to model this?
Thanks,
Chris

Chris,
I wouldn't include those amounts as attributes for 0MAT_PLANT. In general it doesn't make too much sense, except in some very specific cases, to make a Key Figure an Attribute of a Characteristic.
I wouldn't either modify the 0MAT_PLANT key to compound it with UOM... Not a good idea, in my opinion.
In your case, those values can change over time, depending on the validity period. So you could have several records with different validity periods for the same Material and Plant combination.
I'd rather create an ODS with these values. The key fields would be 0MAT_PLANT and the validity dates and the data fields would be the amounts.
You could use and include this ODS in any Multicube or get the values based on the validity periods by using ABAP routines if you need to.
Another thing, as SAP recommends, an InfoObject with more than 500,000 records shouldn't be modeled as Master Data. And 0MAT_PLANT is a perfect candidate for this situation.
So I'd advise to go with the ODS solution.
Hope this helps.
Regards,
Luis

Complex Data Modeling / Sub-Typing

Hi,I am working on a new project and have produced my ERD, and built some constraints to represent sub-typing within the CDM.However, the sub-typing is not as straight forward as representing a column value or relations in separate sub-typing tables.EG.I want to represent or to perform a check if a broker is qualified, so 'qualified' is a type of member in our system, which can be a number of permutations of different industry qualifications.How would you implement this type of sub-typing?Here is an abstract of the ERD / CDMIs the best way to write a TSQL SP to perform the calculation and return true / false?But IIRC you cannot call SP's from within check constraints in SQL, so does it need to be a UDF?Or do I create tables of all the permutations and put the FK's to the qualification records in each table and then perform a compare...
This topic first appeared in the Spiceworks Community

As John said, index deletion often simply deletes an internal database, which is pretty fast.
As for creation, indexing doesn't take much longer than parsing a document, or if it's node storage, iterating through the DB records for the document, so 22000 isn't that many. It'll only write entries if there are index entries to create, and that's pretty fast too.
I'm suspicious that lookupStatistics isn't showing anything. If, in the dbxml shell, you get results from:
dbxml> getDocuments
You will see results for lookupStatistics for the name index, at least:
dbxml> lookupstatistics unique-node-metadata-equality-string http://www.sleepycat.com/2002/dbxml name
Are you sure you are passing the right arguments to lookupStatistics?
Regards,
George

Complex AM Data Model

Hi, there;
I'm facing some situation that is very new for me, so if some of you could give me some tips, there go couple of days that i'm trying.
scenario;
1 Entities;
5 (just five ) View Objects
8 (yes eight ) view Links
Here is the most complex data model that i ever faced
MasterA-->Detail1-->Detail2-->Detail3-->Detail4
+--->Detail4 ( because of FK not present in Detail3 )
MasterB-->Detail2-->Detail3-->Detail4
+----Detail4 (again FK not present in Detail3)
+---Detail3-->Detail4 (again for the same reason )
So MasterA and MasterB must control everything, just as an example MasterA == Employee and MasterB as Current Period.
Only Detail4 is editable and has an entity associated with it, it should have 1 line per period(masterB) and per employee(masterA);
Testing the Application Module everything seems to be fine.
At my JSP + Struts Application i have one jsp for setting the current line of MasterB and MasterA is ok at Login time.
Then i have another jsp page where detail2,Detail3 and detail4 will be part of it. It is suppose to the user to navigate detail2, detail3 and edit or create detail4.
Why Detail4 is not affect when the user command setCurrentRowWithKey link at Detail3 or Detail2 ?
Strange is the fact that if i submit an create event at detail4 all the FK's seams to be ok.

Marcos,
Can you verify whether the problem occurs if you use Immediate mode instead of the default Batch Mode?
Here's something you can read about the two modes...
http://www.oracle.com/technology/products/jdev/collateral/papers/10g/adftoystore/readme.html#batchmode

Using Complex Data Types in Import JavaBean Model

Hi,
I have searched and read forums and weblogs related to import javabean model.
But I am not clear about how to use complex data types like ArrayList, Collection etc in my java bean.
If I use these complex datatypes in my bean, when creating model in WDF it displays the Complex data elements in Model Relation. I dont know how to use this model relation in my WD project.
Anyone please explain the<b> step by step solution</b> about using complex data type(used in Bean) in WD Project.
Thanks,
Krishna Kumar

Hi Krishna,
Valery`s blog contains sample code ( http://www.jroller.com/resources/s/silaev/Employees.zip )
Another blogs from this area:
/people/anilkumar.vippagunta2/blog/2005/09/02/java-bean-model-importer-in-web-dynpro
/people/valery.silaev/blog/2005/08/30/javabean-model-import-when-it-really-works
And forum topics:
Import JavaBean Model
Problem Importing JavaBean Model in NetWeaver Developer Studio
Issue on "Import JavaBean Model"
import JavaBean Model: no executable Methods?
JavaBeans Model Import
POLL : JavaBean Model Importer
JavaBean-Model
Invalid Class - Javabean not available for import
WebDynpro Using JavaBean Model ->Please Help
Best regards, Maksim Rashchynski.

Modelling complex data structures

Hello all,
I'm trying to understand how to model and design a scenario where the data is non-flat (specifically purchase orders). As far as I understand Duet Enterprise does not handle non-flat structures (without custom coding in SharePoint).
What are some options that other people have used to address this?
The two that I thought of are:
1. Model the header and line item data structures separately and then somehow link them in SharePoint
2. Don't use the external list external content type in SharePoint and develop something custom
Does anybody else have any other ideas? Do you have any examples or starting points?
Thank you.

You should avoided passing complex data structure across the JNI boundary. It is slow and it is very difficult to get right. Either make your JNI code so simple that its parameters are primitives or very simple objects, or make your Java code so simple ditto.

Basic questions on data modeling

Hi experts,
I have some basic questions regarding data modeling within MDM. I understand the available table types and the concept of lookup fields. I know that the MDM data modeling concept is different to the relational concept. But having a strong database background my first step was to design a relational data model which I would like to transfer to a MDM repository. Unfortunately I didn't found good information material on this. So here are some questions maybe you can help me:
1) Is it the right approach to model n:m relationships with multivalued lookup fields? E.g. main table Users with lookup field from subtable SapAccounts (a user can have accounts in different SAP systems, that means more than one account).
2) Has a record always be unique in MDM repositories (e.g. should we use Auto ID's in every table or do we have to mark a combination of fields as unique)? Is a composite key of 2 or more fields represented with marking these fields as unique?
3) The concept of relationships in MDM is only based on relationships between single records (not valid for all records in a table)? Is it necessary to define all relationships similar to the relational data model in MDM? Is there something similar to referential integrity in MDM?
4) Is it possible to change the main table to a sub table later on if we realize that it has also to be used as a lookup table for another table (when extending the data model) or do we have to create a new repository from scratch?
Thank you for your answers.
Regards, bd

Yes you are correct. It is almost difficult to map relational database to mdm one. But again MDM is not 'just' a database. It holds much more 'master' information as compared to any relational db.
1) Is it the right approach to model n:m relationships with multivalued lookup fields? E.g. main table Users with lookup field from subtable SapAccounts (a user can have accounts in different SAP systems, that means more than one account).
Yes Here you need to use MV look up tables or can also try Qualifier tables if it gets more complex
2) Has a record always be unique in MDM repositories (e.g. should we use Auto ID's in every table or do we have to mark a combination of fields as unique)? Is a composite key of 2 or more fields represented with marking these fields as unique?
Concept of uniqueness differs here that you also have something called Display Fields (DF). A combination of DF can also be treated as Unique one. For instance while importing records if you select these DF as a combination, you will eliminate any possible of duplicates based on this combination. Auto Id is one of the ways to have a unique id once record is within MDM. While you use UF or DF to eliminate any possible duplicates at import level
3) The concept of relationships in MDM is only based on relationships between single records (not valid for all records in a table)? Is it necessary to define all relationships similar to the relational data model in MDM? Is there something similar to referential integrity in MDM?
Hmm... good one. Referencial Integrity. What I assume you are talking is that if you have relationships between tables then removing a record will not be possible as it is a foreign key for some record. Here MDM does not allow that. As Relationships within MDM are physical and not conceptual. For instance material can have components. Now if material does not exist then any relationship to components is not worthwile to maintain. Hence relationshsip is eliminated. While in relational model relationships are more conceptual. Hence with MDM usage of lookups and main table you do not need to maintain these kind of relationships on your own.
4) Is it possible to change the main table to a sub table later on if we realize that it has also to be used as a lookup table for another table (when extending the data model) or do we have to create a new repository from scratch?
No. It is not possible to convert main table. There is only one main table and it cannot be changed.
I went for the same option but it did not work. What I suggest is to look up your legacy system one by one and see what fields in general can be classified as Master, Reference, Transactional - You will start getting answers immediately.

How to get data model to recognize structure change

I have an extremely complex report that was built almost entirely manually -- except for using the Data Wizard to create the Data Model (multiple queries with multiple groups). The source view that the query Q-1 is based on has changed. It is a change in the precision of the column. How do I get the data model to notice that change? The Width in the Property Palette is still showing 8 when it should now be 16. This is causing the display on the report to be truncated to 8 characters.
I don't want to have to rebuild the data model. It took me 3 days to get it so that it works!
Thanks

PLS OPEN THE QUERY AND THEN CONNECT USING YOUR USER. I THINK WHEN YOU REFRESH THE QUERY AND CONNECT THEN WIDTH IS CHANGE AS THE COLUMN IN THE DATABASE.(i.e. 16)
THANKS,
FAROOQ Thanks for the suggestion. Unfortunately, the same thing happens when I do this as happens if I modify the query with a space (as before); the rows are removed from their groups, and I lose the Source of my calculated fields.
If anyone is interested, I finally found a way to do this:
1. Convert the report into a text file (File>Administration>Convert);
2. open the text file in a text editor;
change the offensive WIDTH settings (make sure to look for all of them);
3. save the text file;
4. then convert it back to a RDF file using the converter.
A round-about way to perform what should be an automatic operation -- but there it is.
--V

Data modeling dilemma for EAV oriented problems in Data Modeler

Hello,
Dealing with EAV( entity attribute value model ) oriented structure of data.
So this look like this:
Entity( Entity_Id number , Entity_Name varchar2, Entity_Desc varchar2 )
Entity that list attributes and some meta data on characteristics of attributes:
Type_Of_Attribute( Attr_Id varchar2, Type_Of_Value TOV_Domain, Unit_Of_Value varchar2 , Min_Value variant_type , Max_Value variant_Type )
Then we have actual data. Entity is described with set of attributes and their values. So aditionally to attributes on row form in Entity there are aditional attrbutes in columnar form.
Because of sparsity...
However there in columnar form the challenge or issue is type of values so domains of attributes.
For example:
weight_of_ person is number between min_number and max_number.
But another parameter for example mood_of_person is string from the domain which consists of set of strings/descpriptions.
Another possibility could be reference to some table of values ( key value ) that could be modelled as one:many relationship if put in entity Entity on row form of attributes.
But since this is attribute relate only to few intances or it is very dispersed....and for preserving table form..it was put in columnar form ..
Attribute_Of_Entity( Entity_Id, Attr_Id, value,
-- when not normalized, could be add also unit like kg or lbs or inch or piece ).
My question is on good/succesfull practice of modelling for VALUE in attribute_of_entity?
Somewhere read that some databases have feature of so-called variant type.
Guess the objective is to modell in such a way that implementation of this model is as easy as possbile in
issues like:
a) validating column oriented form during entering or updating values
b) consolidating queries when reporting
c) agregating data when grouping when grouping data and preventing non-comparable data.
So to implement value as structure/complex_type with methods or there is any other feature supporting variabilty of the data along same column in the table. So logical design that would not cause too much complexity in the relational design and table implementation and procedures are handled as much as possible on the database level?
Thank you in advance for comments, experiences, suggestions,

Hello,
EAV is rarely a good solution. Tell us about your business problem and we might be able to show you solutions that are performant/easier to maintain/...
https://www.simple-talk.com/opinion/opinion-pieces/bad-carma/
Regards
Marcus
BTW: this question should not be asked in the forum space for the tool SQL Data Modeler. Instead ask in SQL and PL/SQL or General Database Discussions

Data Modeler V3 EA1 versus V2.0?

I'm working on a large maintenance project to customize a number of complex applications (~500 tables in total) that have their logical and physical models stored in Designer 10g. If we were to migrate to SQL Developer Data Modeler for this project, would version 2.0 be suitable? Or is there enough missing functionality (as compared to Designer) that would make it unsuitable for a large, complex maintenance project?
I assume that version 3.0 EA1 is not ready for use on a mission-critical project. Correct?
I'd appreciate any suggestions that you might have.
Thanks.

Hi,
you can try both versions. Data Modeler 3.0 is in beta phase and it's not recommended to use it for production. There is a bug in 3.0 EA1 and you cannot import from non versioned Designer repository.
v. 3.0 comes with integrated versioning support and improved functionality in different areas including import from Designer repository and management of large diagrams.
Philip

Data Modeling for controls using XML views(SAPUI5)

Hello ,
I am trying to create Table control using XML view and binding data to it through controller onInit method.
XML View Code is as follows :
<core:View xmlns="sap.m" xmlns:l="sap.ui.layout" xmlns:core="sap.ui.core">
    <l:VerticalLayout width="100%">
        <l:content>
            <Text id="description" class="marginAll" />
            <Table id="idProductsTable" items="{
                path:'/businessData'
            }">
                <headerToolbar>
                    <Toolbar>
                        <Label text="Products"></Label>
                    </Toolbar>
                </headerToolbar>
                <columns>
                    <Column>
                        <Label text="Product" />
                    </Column>
                    <Column>
                        <Label text="Supplier" />
                    </Column>
                    <Column>
                        <Label text="Dimensions" />
                    </Column>
                </columns>
                <items>
                    <ColumnListItem>
                        <cells>
                            <ObjectIdentifier title="{COUNTRY}" text="{COUNTRY}" />
                        </cells>
                        <Text text="{REGION}"></Text>
                        <Text text="{CITY}"></Text>
                    </ColumnListItem>
                </items>
            </Table>
        </l:content>
    </l:VerticalLayout>
</core:View>
Controller onInit method Code is as follows :
var oData = {
            businessData : [ {
                'COUNTRY' : "Canada",
                'CITY' : "Toronto",
                'REGION' : "US",
                'LANGUAGE' : "English"
                'COUNTRY' : "China",
                'CITY' : "Bejeing",
                'REGION' : "Ashia",
                'LANGUAGE' : "Chinese"
        var demoJSONModel = new sap.ui.model.json.JSONModel();
        demoJSONModel.setData(oData);
        sap.ui.getCore().getElementById("idProductsTable").setModel(
                demoJSONModel);
Same thing when i tried with JS views , it worked however through XML view , I am getting empty table.
Is the data modeling correct for XML views?
Thanks,
Mahesh.

I've got it ! The reason for that is you bind items as below,
     <Table id="idProductsTable" items="{
                path:'/businessData'
            }">
This pattern is followed if you wanna add a formatter/sorter/grouping.
As you don't do any of those you can bind items as below & it doesn't require data-sap-ui-xx-bindingSyntax="complex".
<Table id="idProductsTable" items="{/businessData}">

Inheritance in OPA data model

Hi all,
I have a problem which OPM does not seem to handle well, but maybe I am lacking knowledge concerning some functionality. I am using a client patched 10.1 version of OPM.
Situation:
- I have an attribute in Global, which states the possibility to export an entitlement. This attribute is deducted using multiple compositions of conditions on both "child" level and "applicant" level. These are both entities in my data model.
- However, some of the conditions are the generic for both roles. Therefore, what I really want to do is check attributes on "person" level and relate these to "the child" and to "the applicant".
- Now, I've created an entity "the person" with a relation to "the child" and a relation to "the applicant".
This raises an issue with the For/ForAll operator
Issue:
- To use the "For" operator, a -to-one relationship is needed. However, I can have two persons of which one is a child and one is an applicant. So, I need a - to-many relationship for person (from Global)
- If I use the "ForAll" operator to 'work around' this problem, the goal attribute will stay inconclusive as the relationship from person 1 to the child is known, but from person 2 to the child in unknown (and vice versa for the applicant)
Question:
It seems to me that this is an issue of inheritance which OPM cannot handle. I am wondering:
- has anyone dealt with this problem and/or does anyone have a solution?
- is it likely that the entity containment functionality of OPM 10.2 + will be able to solve my issue?
Thanks & regards, Els

Given that I don’t know the details of your source material, and I don’t know Dutch, perhaps the best option is if I show you how to get a simple inferred relationship set up and working. Hopefully then you’ll see what it’s doing and know how to set it up for your own rulebase.
1. Create a new empty test rulebase.
2. Add a Properties file. Add a regular one-to-many containment relationship from Global to ‘the person’.
3. From within the Properties file, have Global selected and in the right hand pane select the Relationships tab.
4. Right-click in an empty space in the right hand pane and select ‘New Relationship’. Use these settings:
- Source: Global (This will already be set, and will be read-only. If it isn’t already set to Global, then you didn’t do Step 3.)
- Target: the person
- Relationship type: Inferred (many-to-many)
- Text: the adults
5. Save the Properties file.
6. Create a Word rule doc.
7. Add a membership rule for the inferred relationship. A membership rule specifies the logic used to decide which instances are members of the inferred relationship. The parts in italics below are just examples of what the red configuration text will look like when the rule is compiled.
+[IsMemberOf(“person”,adults)]+ the person is a member of the adults if
+[p1 >= 18]+ the person's age >= 18
In my example, I’m just basing it on age. It could be based on just about anything. Try to name your inferred relationship appropriately. I called it “the adults” since that’s what the group is. If I needed to have a group of people >= 18 years and who are female, then I’d call it something like ‘the female adults’, and obviously I’d include gender in the membership rule.
8. Add some simple entity calculation rule such as these:
the number of adults in the group = InstanceCount(the adults)
the total amount of savings of the adults in the group = InstanceSum(the adults, the person's savings amount)
9. Build and Debug. Work in the Data tab, not the OWD tab. You’ll be able to see more detail about what’s going on if in the Data tab.
10. Add three instances of ‘the person’. Make two people older than 18 years, and one person younger than 18 years. Give each of them a different savings amount.
11. Look at the Global results and you will see that the InstanceCount rule calculated ‘2’ and the InstanceSum rule only added up the savings from the subset of people who are adults.
My general advice on this is:
If the logic you need to do over subsets of entity instances is relatively simple, and can be easily accommodated by existing Instance functions, then don't bother with inferred relationships. Just set up the regular containment relationship and use the existing entity functions. Here are few examples of less complex entity calculations which can easily be handled without inferred relationships:
- count the number of adults
- calculate the total income of all household members who are over 25 years
- find the age of the youngest male child
So my example rulebase above is actually one for which I wouldn’t use inferred relationships if that was all I needed it for. I just wanted to pick a simple example to explain the concept. To do the example above without inferred relationships, you’d just need to use InstanceCountIf and InstanceSumIf and put the conditional logic in each calculation rule.
If the logic you need to do over subsets of entity instances is much more complex and either it's not possible without inferred relationships, or it's just easier/more concise with inferred relationships, then add inferred relationships.
Cheers,
Jasmine

Interaction Record Data Model

Can someone please give me the list of tables for the Interaction Record? Like Interaction Record data model. For example, all the tables including BP, products, description of the interaction record.

Hello Donna,
The product information associated to Interaction Record, you can find it in CRMD_ORDERADM_I table. Just insert your document GUID in field HEADER, and it will display all items of that document including the product GUID (PRODUCT field). Then you can check in COMM_PRODUCT, for master data information about any product. You can also consult CRMD_PRODUCT_I for more information about product items of your document.
The partner information it is a little more complex. View CRMV_LINKPARTNER will show you how to get it. It envolves two tables: CRMD_LINK and CRMD_PARTNER. With your document GUID, you must consult CRMD_LINK with attributes OBJTYPE_HI = '05' and OBJTYPE_SET = '07'. Then, with GUID_SET of that entry, you must indicate it in table CRMD_PARTNER at field GUID. Hit execute and it will display your partner information.
Kind regards.
Bruno

Is it proper for an application module has 300 views in the data model?

Based on my understanding, all view object instances are initialized at the same time as the application module.
It follows that when an application module is associated with a user session, the queries of each view object in the data model are executed.
ie. if the data model has 325 view object instances, 325 queries will be executed.
This doesn't seem efficient:
1. As each user session only need to access a subset of the view objects (for examples 35 views), the rest of view objects need not be instantiated for that session.
2. Performance may be slow on executing all 325 queries at one time, even worse when some queries are complex queries.
Am I correct on this?
In this case, will it be better to instantiate the view objects using the view object definition at runtime instead of adding all of them to the application module at design time?

No, that's not the default behaviour.
Assuming you're talking JDev 11, the AM on it's General tab as a Tuning option where you can set the loading of the VOs to Lazy or Non-Lazy, Lazy is the default. In turn each VO on their General tab also has a Tuning option of similar nature.
Online documentation says:
Lazy LoadingSelect to choose lazy loading. In this case, the application module instance is created without any of its components. Your view object and nested application module instances will not load until the first time they are used. For example, when lazy loading is enabled, a view object is instantiated only when the application accesses it. This will make start-up time faster.
Non-lazy Loading
Select to choose non-lazy loading. Your view object and nested application module instances will load when the application starts up. For example, suppose the application module you are editing defines three view objects and two nested application modules (which appear in the Application Module Instance section of the Data Model page over the application module overview editor). When lazy loading is disabled, the application module instance is created together with all three view objects and both nested application modules.>
So in essence as you describe for each session, if we're using the Lazy setting, even though you have 325 VOs within an AM, if the user within the session only visits 35 queries, only 35 queries should fire.
Does this help?
CM.

Complex Data Modelling

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for