Conditional Filter issues

Was wondering if there is a conditional filter that will only print a field if the field contains a phrase?
More Info:
Using Label Toolbox in Postalsoft Business Edition v8.00c.03.02
Example:
Have afield that comes in as the Service Adress(SERVADD) and at times the address includes "(INTERNET ONLY)"
example - "420 South 850 West (INTERNET ONLY)"
We have frame that we only want to print when that string contains "(INTERNET ONLY)".
USED:
DB.SERVADD="(INTERNET ONLY)"
DB.SERVADD$"(INTERNET ONLY)"
Of course those are not working because I'm not dealing with a field that may or may not contain the string "(INTERNET ONLY)" but also includes the string for an address.
So my question again is "Is there a conditional filter that will make a frame print only when the field contains the string "(INTERNET ONLY)""?
Thanks for your help.

Hi;
You had the right idea - Murtada's example will work for you. The reason why the second filter did not work is the order of the parameters to the $ matters. The one you are trying to find is the first parameter, and the string to search is the second parameter. Thus, it is a simple case of reversing the "INTERNET ONLY" and DB.SERVADD in your second try.
Thanks;
Tom
Edited by: Tom Thatcher on Sep 23, 2010 9:37 PM

Similar Messages

Filter Issues in P6.2.1

I am facing filter issues in P6.2.1. I used the customized filter for "Planned but Not Started". Below shown were the combination i used to create the filter. but when i run the filter no activities were shown under WBS, i mean empty WBS
1. Early Start - within a range of - PS - DD
Activity Status - Not Started.
2. Early Start - less than or equal to - DD
Activity Status - Not Started.

Hi,
My feeling is that perhaps you don't have any task that is late.
If not, please try following filter:
Start is less than or equals to DD
Activity staus not started yet
I hope it helps.
Regards,
Younus

PO Condition Type Issue

Hi All,
I have encounter a PO condition type issue, hope to get someone to enlighten me.
I have create both cuztomize condition type ZOT2 AND ZOT3.
With config in Control data 1
Cond. Class - A Discount or Surcharge
Calculat. type - B Fixed Amount
Cond. category - B Delivery cost
Group Condition
Select for Group cond. & RoundDiffComp
GrpCond.routine - 1 Overall Document
ZOT2 in header condition should be divided into item via value.
ZOT3 in header condition should be divided into item via quantity.
Both condition type havemanually enter with value 300
In the test PO I have created 3 materials:-
Material     Quantity     Net Price     Item Net
A     100     1,615.00     161,500.00
B     100          16.15         1,615.00
C     1000          16.15       16,150.00
In the Item view calculation for both condition type as stated below:-
ZOT2 - 270.27 : 2.70 : 27.03 (Ratios base on Value 100:1:10)
ZOT3 - 270.27 : 2.70 : 27.03 (Rations base on Quantity 1:1:10) the amount result should be 25: 25: 250 but the result I get from the system for condition type ZOT3 is the same as ZOT2.
Please advise how to reticfy the configuration. Thank you.

Eugenia Foong Pui Mun wrote:
Hi Shiva,
>
> I have try to config with the info you have suggested, but it does not seem to get the expected result.
Hi Eugenia...
I tested scenario with values you have mentioned. It works perfect both ways. Pls follow this....
1. Pls avert the changes I had suggested in my prev reply for changing the condition types. (group condition active, round diff condition & group cond routine, keep them as they are)
2. While you enter value in header with condition type ZOT2. the value gets properly distribute by the ratio 100:1:10 and thats perfect......Now
3. While you enter the values for condition type ZOT3 in the header...Pls note that your Total Qty is 1200 and the total condition value is 300 this means per unit qty the value is 300/1200 =0.25...
Now while you enter the values for ZOT3 in the header, enter 300 in the Amount column and 1200 in the Per column, meaning that the total of 300 shoud be divided into 1200 units irrespective of quantities per Line Item
Now check the results and you will have the distribution ratio 1:1:100
NB:For ZOT3 (Qty base) to work the UoM for all the line items must be similar
Pls check and revert
Regards
Shiva
Edited by: Shivaspatil on Nov 24, 2011 12:42 PM

Essbase Security Filter issue.

Hi,
Its regarding the security filter issue.
The major problem is whosoever user is provisioned under that security filter, if the user is trying to connect to Application using Excel Addin / Smartview, it crashes the essbase server [Network Error [10061], timed out error)]
When we figured out because of this filter essbase server is crashing, we tried to edit the filter. sometimes if we click on edit, it crashes the server or sometimes we can see some junk characters in the filter.
We have applied the security on Entities dimension and problematic filter is ASP.
Now the hirerachy is like this.
Entities dimesnsion and then ASP member and under ASP we have our several members.
Filter is like this:
Write : @Idescendants("ASP")
It was working fine for almost 15 days.
Now if i edit the filter, i can see like this:
Write : @Idescendants("ASP")
Metaread:@Idescendants("*&^%?)
Junk characters are coming in and no idea from where they are coming.
I can't delete the filter also, again it crashes the essbase server.
As a workaround i have created a temp filter and dome the assignation for this group, according to that.
Everything is working fine.
I just wanted to know, has anybody faced such kind of problem earlier.
What cud be the root cause for this.
How could I delete the filter.
I have also get messages like security file is corrupted (we have restored it from old backup) but really worried about security file as we are moving the whole thing to production server this weekend.
Please advise me on this, Please help me. Any help would be highly appreciated.
I am really in trouble.
Thanks,
Pankaj Mehta.

Try to edit the filter from MaxL command line using
alter filter sample.basic.filt7 add write on '@IDescendants("ASP")';
here sample=application
basic=database
filt7=filtername
have good luck

Oracle APEX 4.0 - Interactive Report - Table Column Filter Issue

Environment: Oracle APEX 4.0 - Interactive Report - Table Column header Filter Issue
We have developed an interactive report using Oracle APEX 4.0, which contains a record count of around 3,000 Rows. All the rows values are unique in nature. When we try to filter the same with the help of column header filter option available in the interactive report,We get only 1000 records.
Could some one help us, why this behaviour under APEX Table Column Header Filter as if it does not display beyond 1000 distinct values.
Is there a way or workaround on how to get all the records in the column header filter?
Thanks in advance.
Krish

Hi
Thanks for the advice and this issue has been moved to the below URL
Oracle APEX 4.0 - Interactive Report - Table Column Filter Issue Posted: No
Krish

Oracle APEX 4.0 - Interactive Report - Table Column Filter Issue Posted: No

Environment: Oracle APEX 4.0 - Interactive Report - Table Column header Filter Issue
We have developed an interactive report using Oracle APEX 4.0, which contains a record count of around 3,000 Rows. All the rows values are unique in nature. When we try to filter the same with the help of column header filter option available in the interactive report,We get only 1000 records.
Could some one help us, why this behaviour under APEX Table Column Header Filter as if it does not display beyond 1000 distinct values.
Is there a way or workaround on how to get all the records in the column header filter?
Thanks in advance.
Krish

Krish,
Interactive report has hard coded limit to display 1000 rows of column filter LOV for performance. Unfortunately, the limit cannot be changed. The workaround is to define a Column Filter LOV for the column instead of using "Default Based on Column Type".
Regards,
Christina

Webdynrpo ALV filter issue

Hi All,
In web dynpro ALV we have one column called Article . I am trying to find the article 661-2689 by using Standard SAP filter option but the Article is getting converted to 000000000000000661-000000000000002689 . This zero appending happens when I choose the Filter/ Press enter key . It does not find the article by using Filter option .
Our system version is SAP_BASIS 700 . Please let me know if there is any solution to this ALV Filter issue .
Thanks in advance,
Kiran.

Hi Kiran,
It depends on the attribute's data element. If it's NUMC this property is automatically displayed in the context in the bottom panel labeled "Formatting".
But if you are trying to do it whit Article i think the data element is MATNR of type CHAR, so this property will not be displayed.
May be, you need to convert the value assigned to your filter field before to trigger the filter. I think you have created an action for the event "onFilter" in your table, so in this action before to do "wd_this->table_filter->apply_filter( )" maybe you need to use the FM CONVERSION_EXIT_ALPHA_OUTPUT in order to quit the leading zeros.

Query Filter issue......

Hi ,
I want to filter my query data based on the char comparasion. For example : I want to show only those record having CRSD date not Between Valid from & Valid to.
CRSD, Valid from , Valid to are my three characterestic. Can anyone please suggest how can I do the comparasion between Characterstic date.
I checked that condion only allows to compare the key figure with oprater and value. My issue is how to compare three charcterstics.
Regards,
Vishal

Sorry, I didn't get your question,,,
You'll have to create three formula variables based on your validfrom, validto and CRSD.
The vars have to be replacement path, characteristic = validfrom (resp validto, CSRD), type number.
Then create three CKF = to each of your formula variable. Their property time of calculation" (>>enhance) should be "before aggregation".
Drag these CKF in your query.
Now I am not sure: either you have to create two separate conditions:
- CKF_CRSD > CKF_FROM + CKF_CRSD < CKF_TO
or one condition with both filters.
You'll have to try that.
hope that's clear, otherwise revert,
Olivier.

NULL IS NOT NULL filter issue

Can someone explain why 'Y' = 'N' is not working with PARALLEL Plan? i.e. With the filter like 'Y' = 'N' specified and if PQ is used , it does not return instantly. In fact it reads the entire table.
Here is the test case.. Goal is to execute only one of the SQL joined by union all. I have included 'Y' = 'N' in both SQLs for the test purpose.
DB Version is 10.2.0.4
Create table test_tbl_01 nologging as select do.* from dba_objects do , dba_objects d1 where rownum < 22000001;
Create table test_tbl_02 nologging as select do.* from dba_objects do , dba_objects d1 where rownum < 22000001;
execute DBMS_STATS.GATHER_TABLE_STATS('SCOTT', 'TEST_TBL_01');
execute DBMS_STATS.GATHER_TABLE_STATS('SCOTT', 'TEST_TBL_02');
*Serial path with 2 table join*
SQL> select
2    /* parallel(t1,2 ) parallel(t2,2) */
3    t1.*
4    from test_tbl_01 t1 ,test_tbl_02 t2
5    where t1.object_name = t2.object_name
6    and 'Y' = 'N'
7    and t1.object_type = 'TABLE'
8    union all
9    select
10    /* parallel(t1,2 ) parallel(t2,2) */
11    t1.*
12    from test_tbl_01 t1 ,test_tbl_02 t2
13    where t1.object_name = t2.object_name
14    and 'Y' = 'N'
15 /
no rows selected
Elapsed: 00:00:00.01
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 3500703583
| Id | Operation            | Name        | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT     |             |     2 |   168 |       |     0   (0)|          |
|   1 | UNION-ALL           |             |       |       |       |            |          |
|* 2 |   FILTER             |             |       |       |       |            |          |
|* 3 |    HASH JOIN         |             |   660G|    50T|   449M| 6242K (99)| 24:16:38 |
|* 4 |     TABLE ACCESS FULL| TEST_TBL_01 | 5477K|   386M|       | 41261   (2)| 00:09:38 |
|   5 |     TABLE ACCESS FULL| TEST_TBL_02 |    22M|   212M|       | 40933   (2)| 00:09:34 |
|* 6 |   FILTER             |             |       |       |       |            |          |
|* 7 |    HASH JOIN         |             | 2640G|   201T|   467M|    24M(100)| 95:54:53 |
|   8 |     TABLE ACCESS FULL| TEST_TBL_02 |    22M|   212M|       | 40933   (2)| 00:09:34 |
|   9 |     TABLE ACCESS FULL| TEST_TBL_01 |    21M| 1546M|       | 41373   (3)| 00:09:40 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   2 - filter(NULL IS NOT NULL)
   3 - access("T1"."OBJECT_NAME"="T2"."OBJECT_NAME")
   4 - filter("T1"."OBJECT_TYPE"='TABLE')
   6 - filter(NULL IS NOT NULL)
   7 - access("T1"."OBJECT_NAME"="T2"."OBJECT_NAME")
Statistics
          1 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
          0 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
          0 redo size
        567 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        232 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          1 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
          0 rows processed
*Parallel path with 2 table join*
SQL> select
2    /*+ parallel(t1,2 ) parallel(t2,2) */
3    t1.*
4    from test_tbl_01 t1 ,test_tbl_02 t2
5    where t1.object_name = t2.object_name
6    and 'Y' = 'N'
7    and t1.object_type = 'TABLE'
8    union all
9    select
10    /*+ parallel(t1,2 ) parallel(t2,2) */
11    t1.*
12    from test_tbl_01 t1 ,test_tbl_02 t2
13    where t1.object_name = t2.object_name
14    and 'Y' = 'N'
15 /
no rows selected
Elapsed: 00:01:09.34
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 1557722279
| Id | Operation                   | Name        | Rows | Bytes |TempSpc| Cost (%CPU)| Time     |    TQ |IN-OUT| PQ Distrib |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT            |             |     2 |   168 |       |     0   (0)|          |     |         |            |
|   1 | PX COORDINATOR             |             |       |       |       |            |          |     |         |            |
|   2 |   PX SEND QC (RANDOM)       | :TQ10004    |       |       |       |            |          | Q1,04 | P->S | QC (RAND) |
|   3 |    BUFFER SORT              |             |     2 |   168 |       |            |          | Q1,04 | PCWP |            |
|   4 |     UNION-ALL               |             |       |       |       |            |          | Q1,04 | PCWP |            |
|* 5 |      FILTER                 |             |       |       |       |            |          | Q1,04 | PCWC |            |
|* 6 |       HASH JOIN             |             |   660G|    50T|   224M| 3465K (99)| 13:28:42 | Q1,04 | PCWP |            |
|   7 |        PX JOIN FILTER CREATE| :BF0000     | 5477K|   386M|       | 22861   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,04 | PCWP |            |
|   8 |         PX RECEIVE          |             | 5477K|   386M|       | 22861   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,04 | PCWP |            |
|   9 |          PX SEND HASH       | :TQ10000    | 5477K|   386M|       | 22861   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,00 | P->P | HASH       |
| 10 |           PX BLOCK ITERATOR |             | 5477K|   386M|       | 22861   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,00 | PCWC |            |
|* 11 |            TABLE ACCESS FULL| TEST_TBL_01 | 5477K|   386M|       | 22861   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,00 | PCWP |            |
| 12 |        PX RECEIVE           |             |    22M|   212M|       | 22679   (1)| 00:05:18 | Q1,04 | PCWP |            |
| 13 |         PX SEND HASH        | :TQ10001    |    22M|   212M|       | 22679   (1)| 00:05:18 | Q1,01 | P->P | HASH       |
| 14 |          PX JOIN FILTER USE | :BF0000     |    22M|   212M|       | 22679   (1)| 00:05:18 | Q1,01 | PCWP |            |
| 15 |           PX BLOCK ITERATOR |             |    22M|   212M|       | 22679   (1)| 00:05:18 | Q1,01 | PCWC |            |
| 16 |            TABLE ACCESS FULL| TEST_TBL_02 |    22M|   212M|       | 22679   (1)| 00:05:18 | Q1,01 | PCWP |            |
|* 17 |      FILTER                 |             |       |       |       |            |          | Q1,04 | PCWC |            |
|* 18 |       HASH JOIN             |             | 2640G|   201T|   233M|    13M(100)| 53:15:52 | Q1,04 | PCWP |            |
| 19 |        PX RECEIVE           |             |    22M|   212M|       | 22679   (1)| 00:05:18 | Q1,04 | PCWP |            |
| 20 |         PX SEND HASH        | :TQ10002    |    22M|   212M|       | 22679   (1)| 00:05:18 | Q1,02 | P->P | HASH       |
| 21 |          PX BLOCK ITERATOR |             |    22M|   212M|       | 22679   (1)| 00:05:18 | Q1,02 | PCWC |            |
| 22 |           TABLE ACCESS FULL | TEST_TBL_02 |    22M|   212M|       | 22679   (1)| 00:05:18 | Q1,02 | PCWP |            |
| 23 |        PX RECEIVE           |             |    21M| 1546M|       | 22924   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,04 | PCWP |            |
| 24 |         PX SEND HASH        | :TQ10003    |    21M| 1546M|       | 22924   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,03 | P->P | HASH       |
| 25 |          PX BLOCK ITERATOR |             |    21M| 1546M|       | 22924   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,03 | PCWC |            |
| 26 |           TABLE ACCESS FULL | TEST_TBL_01 |    21M| 1546M|       | 22924   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,03 | PCWP |            |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   5 - filter(NULL IS NOT NULL)
   6 - access("T1"."OBJECT_NAME"="T2"."OBJECT_NAME")
11 - filter("T1"."OBJECT_TYPE"='TABLE')
17 - filter(NULL IS NOT NULL)
18 - access("T1"."OBJECT_NAME"="T2"."OBJECT_NAME")
Statistics
       1617 recursive calls
          3 db block gets
     488929 consistent gets
     493407 physical reads
        636 redo size
        567 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        232 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          1 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          6 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
          0 rows processedHowever single table with UNION ALL and PQ works..
*NO Joins (i.e. Single Table with PQ ) , Issue does not show-up.*
_*SERIAL PLAN with one Table*_
SQL> select
2    /* parallel(t1,2 )   */
3    t1.*
4    from test_tbl_01 t1
5    where 'Y' = 'N'
6    and t1.object_type = 'TABLE'
7    union all
8    select
9    /* parallel(t1,2 )   */
10    t1.*
11    from test_tbl_01 t1
12    where 'Y' = 'N'
13 /
no rows selected
Elapsed: 00:00:00.01
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 2870519681
| Id | Operation           | Name        | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT    |             |     2 |   148 |     0   (0)|          |
|   1 | UNION-ALL          |             |       |       |            |          |
|* 2 |   FILTER            |             |       |       |            |          |
|* 3 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL| TEST_TBL_01 | 5477K|   386M| 41261   (2)| 00:09:38 |
|* 4 |   FILTER            |             |       |       |            |          |
|   5 |    TABLE ACCESS FULL| TEST_TBL_01 |    21M| 1546M| 41373   (3)| 00:09:40 |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   2 - filter(NULL IS NOT NULL)
   3 - filter("T1"."OBJECT_TYPE"='TABLE')
   4 - filter(NULL IS NOT NULL)
Statistics
          0 recursive calls
          0 db block gets
          0 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
          0 redo size
        567 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        232 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          1 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          0 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
          0 rows processed
_*PARALLEL PLAN with one Table*_
SQL> select
2    /*+ parallel(t1,2 )      */
3    t1.*
4    from test_tbl_01 t1
5    where 'Y' = 'N'
6    and t1.object_type = 'TABLE'
7    union all
8    select
9    /*+ parallel(t1,2 )      */
10    t1.*
11    from test_tbl_01 t1
12    where 'Y' = 'N'
13 /
no rows selected
Elapsed: 00:00:00.09
Execution Plan
Plan hash value: 3114025180
| Id | Operation              | Name        | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time     |    TQ |IN-OUT| PQ Distrib |
|   0 | SELECT STATEMENT       |             |     2 |   148 |     0   (0)|          |        |      |            |
|   1 | PX COORDINATOR        |             |       |       |            |          |        |      |            |
|   2 |   PX SEND QC (RANDOM) | :TQ10000    |       |       |            |          | Q1,00 | P->S | QC (RAND) |
|   3 |    UNION-ALL           |             |       |       |            |          | Q1,00 | PCWP |            |
|* 4 |     FILTER             |             |       |       |            |          | Q1,00 | PCWC |            |
|   5 |      PX BLOCK ITERATOR |             | 5477K|   386M| 22861   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,00 | PCWC |            |
|* 6 |       TABLE ACCESS FULL| TEST_TBL_01 | 5477K|   386M| 22861   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,00 | PCWP |            |
|* 7 |     FILTER             |             |       |       |            |          | Q1,00 | PCWC |            |
|   8 |      PX BLOCK ITERATOR |             |    21M| 1546M| 22924   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,00 | PCWC |            |
|   9 |       TABLE ACCESS FULL| TEST_TBL_01 |    21M| 1546M| 22924   (2)| 00:05:21 | Q1,00 | PCWP |            |
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
   4 - filter(NULL IS NOT NULL)
   6 - filter("T1"."OBJECT_TYPE"='TABLE')
   7 - filter(NULL IS NOT NULL)
Statistics
         28 recursive calls
          3 db block gets
          7 consistent gets
          0 physical reads
        628 redo size
        567 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
        232 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
          1 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
          2 sorts (memory)
          0 sorts (disk)
          0 rows processed

The same behvious appears in 11.1.0.6, and you don't need such a large data set to prove the point. The paralllel distribution may change to a broadcast with a smaller data set, but I demonstrated the effect when my two tables simply selected 30,000 rows each from all_objects.
I think you should pass this to Oracle Corp. as a bug - using the smaller data set.
The problem seems to be the way that Oracle combines multiple lines of a plan into groups of operations (as in PCWC, PCWC, PCWP). It looks like this particularly example has managed to fold the FILTER into a group in such a way that Oracle has lost track of the fact that it is a 'pre-emptng - i.e. always false' filter rather than an ordinary data filter; consequently the filter doesn't apply until after the hash join starts running.
In my example (which did a broadcast distribution) I could see that Oracle read the entire first table, then started to read the second table, but stopped after one row of the second table, because my plan allowed the join and filter to be applied immediately after the first row from the second table. And I think Oracle decided that the filter was alway going to be false at that moment - so stopped running the second tablescan. You've used a hash/hash distribriution, which has resulted in both scans completing because the slaves in each layer don't talk to each other.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
"Science is more than a body of knowledge; it is a way of thinking"
Carl Sagan

Tax condition types issue in sales order

Hi Friends,
I am bit lost with the following issue. I have searched sdn and other SAP forums for this. There were similar issues discussed but they didnu2019t solve my issue. There was exactly similar issue but it was unanswered. So I am posting the issue here to get some inputs.
This is the Indian tax scenario. I have configured pricing procedure where I have JVAT and JCST. If the company is selling to customer in the same state where company is located letu2019s say region 05 JCST 2% applicable. If the customer is outside region 05 then 5% JVAT should applicable.
=> In the pricing procedure it was like
150 0 JVAT
160 0 JCST
Both will be calculate on the gross value.
=> I have created two new tax classifications for customer master.
JCST   2   Tax liable outside region 05
JVAT 3    Tax liable inside region 05
So in the customer master I have both JCST and JVAT. I have created a customer with region 05 and in customer master under Billing document tab I have entries like below
Country    Name   Tax Category   Name   Tax classification Description
IN              India        JCST                IN: CST              2                  Tax liable outside region 05
IN              India        JVAT               IN: VAT              0                  Tax Exempt
=> I have created condition record for JCST with the following key combination
Country u2013 IN
Region of dlv. Plant u2013 05
Region u2013 05
TaxClass1-Cust. -- 2
TaxCl.Mat u2013 1
Amount u2013 2 percentage
Tax code u2013 A1 (TAXINN A1 2% Output tax)
=> With the above condition records maintained for JCST and maintaining tax classification as 2 for JCST and 0 for JVAT, I assume in Sales order SAP should calculate tax JCST 2 percentage. But in sales order SAP is not considering JCST and JVAT. For JVAT it makes sense as it does not have condition records. But I didnu2019t get the reason for not getting JCST. When I checked analysis and click on JCST condition type it says condition record is missing. Surprisingly when I click on the access details it shows u201CTaxClass1-Cust. as 0u201D it didnu2019t show as 2 as maintained in the customer master.
When I change the Tax classification for JVAT from 0 to 1 or from 0 to 3 in the customer master, in the analysis when I click on access details for JCST it shows tax classification maintained for JVAT that is as 1 or 3 so it seems SAP is not considering JCST in customer master at all. Why is that so?
The access (condition table) for JCST and JVAT are same.
Any inputs?

Hai SAP_2006,
We are also having similar requirement and inform the USER to maintain
In our customer master we gave like
Customer master:
Sales area data
Billing documents
JTX1     Tax Jurisdict.Code d     1     Full Tax 12.5%
JTX2     Tax Jurisdict.Code d     1     Full Tax 12.5%
JTX3     Tax Jurisdict.Code d     1     Full Tax 12.5%
JTX4     Tax Jurisdict.Code d     1     Full Tax 12.5%
To get LST we maintain
Country u2013 IN
Region of dlv. Plant u2013 05
Region u2013 05
TaxClass1-Cust. -- 1
TaxCl.Mat u2013 1
Amount u2013 12.5 percentage
Tax code u2013 A2 (TAXINN A1 12.5% Output tax)
To get CST
Country u2013 IN
Region of dlv. Plant u2013 05
Region u2013 06
TaxClass1-Cust. -- 1
TaxCl.Mat u2013 1
Amount u2013 12.5 percentage
Tax code u2013 A2 (TAXINN A2 12.5% Output tax)
In case if they want CST 2%, then user has to go
Sales order header Biiling
Alt tax Classification : Shouls change the Blank to 2 in the 1 box out of 4.
for that we maintained condition record as
Country u2013 IN
Region of dlv. Plant u2013 05
Region u2013 06
TaxClass1-Cust. -- 2
TaxCl.Mat u2013 1
Amount u2013 12.5 percentage
Tax code u2013 A3 (TAXINN A3 2% Output tax)
This doesn't require to change customer master regularly and default system finds LST or CST 12.5 unless they change to 2% system will not change automatic. So CST 2% Vs CSTfull tax risk is also avoided.
Regards,
Mani

ADF Table filter issue with OR or AND input value

Hi all,
adf:table filterable fields for OR or AND input value not works. Actually One of column is for State and it has "OR" value for -> OREGON State.
and I tried using filterModel and queryListener for table attribute. But I am not getting exact clue where I need to fix for this issue. Any suggestion and help is appreciated greatly.
jdev version 11.1.1.3
Thank you.
- Robin

Something like this might work for the one case:
public void handleQuery(QueryEvent queryEvent){
    // Replace the OR with an equivalent condition
    Map m =
      ((FilterableQueryDescriptor) (queryEvent.getDescriptor())).getFilterCriteria();
    for (Map.Entry entry: (Collection<Map.Entry>) m.entrySet())
      if (entry.getValue() != null &&
          StringUtils.equalsIgnoreCase(entry.getValue().toString(), "OR"))
        entry.setValue("O AND _R");
    // Process The Query
    ELUtils.invokeMethod("#{bindings.VOQuery.processQuery}",
                         QueryEvent.class, queryEvent);
    // Put the OR back
    for (Map.Entry entry: (Collection<Map.Entry>) m.entrySet())
      if (entry.getValue() != null &&
          StringUtils.equalsIgnoreCase(entry.getValue().toString(),
                                       "O AND _R"))
        entry.setValue("OR");
}

Filter issue in MDX query leaving some values empty!

Hi all,
In short: I have a report with multiple values such as name of shop, postal code etc. The parameters have no default value and act as "like". If someone enters "krant" he'll get all the shop names that contain "krant" in their
name etc.
Same goes for postal code, if someone enters 2550 he'll get all data for 2550. The problem although is that if a user start with postal code as parameters and leaves the shop name empty, the shop name is not shown in my report! The other way around it works,
when I enter shop name i'll get all shops + postal code in my report.
I know this is because POS name cannot be shown in report because it's left blank, but I want my MDX query to be able to give me the POS names even if I only enter postal code.
Can someone please please look at my query below? I need to add 4 more parameters this way later on too!
SELECT
[Measures].[Sales amount]
ON COLUMNS, NON EMPTY
Filter(
[Point of sale].[POS name].AllMembers,
InStr(
[Point of sale].[POS name].CurrentMember.MEMBER_CAPTION,
@PAR_POSName
) > 0
*Filter(
[Point of sale].[POS postal code].AllMembers,
InStr(
[Point of sale].[POS postal code].CurrentMember.MEMBER_CAPTION,
@PAR_POSTAL_CODE
) > 0
*[Point of sale].[Client id].[Client id]
*[Point of sale].[POS id].[POS id]
*[Point of sale].[POS street].[POS street]
*[Point of sale].[POS town].[POS town]
*[Point of sale].[POS housenumber].[POS housenumber]
ON ROWS
FROM [mycube]

Hi Yvanlathem,
Have you create the parameters in the MDX Query Designer? I haved tested it on my local environment (Microsoft SQL Server 2012 (SP1) - 11.0.3401.0 (X64) Enterprise Edition (64-bit)), we cannot reproduce this issue.
with
set subset1
as
filter ([Geography].[Geography].[Country].members,
instr([Geography].[Geography].currentmember.name,@name)>0
select {} on 0,
subset1 on 1
from
[Adventure Works]
Reference
Define Parameters in the MDX Query Designer for Analysis Services (Report Builder and SSRS)
Regards,
Charlie Liao
TechNet Community Support

Upgrade Vista to Windows 7 Keyboard Filter Issue

I really need some help with this...
I upgraded vista to Windows 7 full retail version.
Compatability check said to update keyboard filter. I couldnt find much info about this and assumed it wouldnt affect it too much except extra functions I probly never use.
Unfortunately, my keyboard doesnt function properly at all.
Im using HP G30-260US laptop.
I have now disconnected the keyboard ribbon and plugged in a usb keyboard, quite a pain to use this one, but at least its working. I would really like to know of a fix for this issue to get my real keyboard working and windows 7 is already running on this computer, from upgrading, not a clean install. I've tried installing a different quick launch buttons driver and uninstalled it completely after windows 7 but no success.
Please help me hehe
Thanks a miillion
Matt
This question was solved.
View Solution.

Matt, you may want to start a thread here:
http://h30434.www3.hp.com/psg/?category.id=Notebook
It is HP's Notebook (laptop) forums.
Signature:
HP TouchPad - 1.2 GHz; 1 GB memory; 32 GB storage; WebOS/CyanogenMod 11(Kit Kat)
HP 10 Plus; Android-Kit Kat; 1.0 GHz Allwinner A31 ARM Cortex A7 Quad Core Processor ; 2GB RAM Memory Long: 2 GB DDR3L SDRAM (1600MHz); 16GB disable eMMC 16GB v4.51
HP Omen; i7-4710QH; 8 GB memory; 256 GB San Disk SSD; Win 8.1
HP Photosmart 7520 AIO
++++++++++++++++++
**Click the Thumbs Up+ to say 'Thanks' and the 'Accept as Solution' if I have solved your problem.**
Intelligence is God given; Wisdom is the sum of our mistakes!
I am not an HP employee.

Filter issues in BI 7.0

Hi Experts,
I have an issue with filters in BI 7.0. As per the requirement I need to restrict one object with two variables. One variable for named user and other variable for user entry. I restricted named user varible in 'Filter section' and user entry variable was restricted in 'default values' section. I used same restriction in three queries and created a workbook with these three queries.
I tried to refresh the workbook with specified WBS element. First time it is working fine , when I try to refresh workbook again the user entry variable is disappearing in the selection screen.
any one help on this how to correct.
Thanks,
Madhu

Hi Raj,
Would suggest check the transformation for the records not being retrieved.
With regard to 3 objects being displayed it is the Detail view for the transformation. There is a button in the Transformation view (2nd from right) "Switch detail view on/off". If you click that you would get just two objects
if that makes the graphical view more clear with just hte source and the target objects.
Hope it helps.
Cheers
Anurag

Filter Issue in 9.3.1

Hi All,
We are using 9.3.1 essbase. We have some issues with Filter.
We have configured shared services.
Can we assign multiple filters to a single user without using MAXL.
Any help will be highly appreciated.
Thanks in advance

Hi Glenn,
Thanks for the quick reply.
Appreciate if you could guide us further. The Steps we would follow are-
1. Create users with provisioning in shared services
2. Create a group say x and do the provisioning for the group.
3. Create a filter with all provisioning as required.
4. Assign a group with filter.
Requirement.
Assign multiple filters to a group. This is possible in shared services.
The client has created multiple groups and multiple filters and is asking for the above requrement.
Please let us know the steps.
Thanks in advance.

Conditional Filter issues

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for