Date filter issue

Hi all,
I want to filter my report with two date , one is coming from dashboard prompt as presentation variable and other i'm subtracting 7 days from the input date .
Here i'm using filter in advance sql like
"Alerts View".STATUS_DT <= '@{SDate}'
"Alerts View".STATUS_DT >= timestampadd(sql_tsi_day ,-7 ,Date'@{SDate}')
i'm getting date format error , below is the log
Error Codes: YQCO4T56:OPR4ONWY:U9IM8TAC:OI2DL65P
Odbc driver returned an error (SQLExecDirectW).
State: HY000. Code: 10058. [NQODBC] [SQL_STATE: HY000] [nQSError: 10058] A general error has occurred. [nQSError: 46046] Datetime value 5/26/2009 does not match the specified format. (HY000)
SQL Issued: {call NQSGetLevelDrillability('SELECT "Alerts View".REVIEW_ID saw_0, "Alerts View".LAST_ACTVY_TYPE_CD saw_1, "Alerts View".STATUS_DT saw_2, "Alerts View".STATUS_DT saw_3, case when 1=0 then "Alerts View".STATUS_CD else ''Week'' end saw_4 FROM "Common Productivity Reports for Alerts" WHERE ("Alerts View".STATUS_DT <= timestampadd(sql_tsi_day ,0 ,Date''5/26/2009'')) AND ("Alerts View".STATUS_DT >= timestampadd(sql_tsi_day ,-7 ,Date''5/26/2009'')) AND (case when 1=0 then "Alerts View".STATUS_CD else ''Week'' end = ''Week'')')}Please help me if anyone knows.

my bad luck ........ still it did not work . but in that link Goran has written the below msg
Let's change now dateSeparator and dateOrder entries in localedefiniitions.xml to see what will happen. I want to see date in my user friendly format dd.mm.yyyy, with or without leading zeros (01.01.2008 or 1.1.2008), so I changed dateOrder to dmy and dateSeparator to zero (.).
so I changed dateOrder to dmy and dateSeparator to zero (.).
what is the meaning of --> dateSeparator to zero (.).
exactly what to put in dateSeparator tag.
he has clearly written for leading zero , we have to change dateSeparator.

Similar Messages

Data Filter issue with

Hi,
We have created a document from an Essbase ASO cube.
A data filter have been created in Essbase ASO Cube. The data filter is 'all Europe Region'. When this data filter is applied to the user and user logs in WA and accesses the document, the below error is produced.
========================================================
Loading this document produced errors.
Unknown members or dimensions have been removed from the document in an attempt to fix the problem.
Saving this document now will prevent these errors when the document is loaded again.
[1033] Native: 1001005 [Fri Mar 06 16:59:20 2009]uxsy9dbt.cos.agilent.com/vip_main/vip_main//Error(1001005) Unknown Member [Americas] in Report
==============================================
With no data filter assigned to the user, the report is fine...
Tested the same data filter in Excel-addin and there are no issues/error. Is there any setting that needs to be changed in WebAnalysis?

Following up even thought his is an old issue. Out of the blue my users began complaining their security in Web Analysis had gone awry. Their security in Excel add-in was fine though.
Most users use a WA Shared Preferences File here. However one user, unbeknownst to me, was able to hard code their userID/password in the "database" connection for the Shared Preference. So anytime another user logged in to Web Analysis, if you open the View Pane to see all the details, the Database user was John Doe - which was wrong, but the WebAnalysis user was John Smith - which was correct. The John Doe user like I said somehow managed to "save" his userID/pwd as the default, which caused all other users to "pass through" to Essbase as John Doe instead of as themselves, which means they were getting HIS filter not their own.
I wasn't able to figure out how he did that but to fix it I deleted his profile then Edited the Shared Preferences File | Databases tab | highlight database in question and choose Edit | change "Default logon" back to "Use User's ID and Password" instead of "Enter User ID and Password...John Doe|Pwd".
It works fine now. Users get their same, correct security filters applied whether they go in to Web Analysis or Excel add-in. (In Web Analysis we have it set up to open a report at a certain location depending on their security filters, so this was causing us quite a headache until we figured out what the problem was).
I opened a case with Tech Support to try and shed light on how the user was able to hard-code their login credentials in to the Shared Preference. Everyone only has Read access to that file, so. ?
HTH,
Karen S.

Date Filter issues in MII Messaging

Hi all,
We have an issue on a newly commissioned MII server (12.1.5 build 99; Windows Server 2008 R2, SQL Server 2008) whereby date filters (From Date; To Date) are set to the incorrect format in the MII Message Monitor query form. The filters default to M D Y format and we require D M Y format. Date is stored correctly in the db table.
Where is this configuration set?
In addition to this I note that there numerous warning entries in the MII log of the type '** MISSING RESOURCE: Unable to localize ,< object name>'* where object name seems to be referring to a number of date/time type ojects (eg XCOL_MON, XSLT_TODAY,XLST_DECEMBER etc etc). This seems related to the first problem, if only in problem domain. How do we address this?

Thanks Mike,
I have been through almost the entire Netweaver Admin cockpit, including the UME, and again with an experienced NW admin but cannot locate where these defaults are set.
Can you point me to where this is configured, please?
Mark

Performance issue on Date filter

In my where condition I wanted a date filter on sale date. I want all sales after 9/1/2014.
CASE1
If I explicitly use date filter like
SaleDate > '2014-09-01 00:00:00:000' I am getting the result in 2 seconds.
CASE2
Since I may need to use this data value again, I created a date table with single column "date" and loaded the value '2014-09-01 00:00:00:000' .
So now my where is like
SaleDate > (Select date from dateTable)
When I run this , the result does not show up even after 10 mins. Both date types are datetime. I am baffled. Why is this query not coming up with the result?

As mentioned by Erland, for the optimizer, both situation are very different. With a literal, the optimizer can properly estimate the number of qualifying rows and adapt the query plan appropriately. With a scalar subquery, the value is unknown at compile
time, and the optimizer will use heuristics to accommodate any value. In this case, the selection for all rows more recent than September 1st 2014 is probably a small percentage of the table.
I can't explain why the optimizer or engine goes awry, because the subquery's result is a scalar, and shouldn't result in such long runtime. If you are unlucky, the optimizer expanded the query and actually joins the two tables. That would make the indexes
on table dateTable relevant, as well as distribution and cardinality of dateTable's row values. If you want to know, you would have to inspect the (actual) query plan.
In general, I don't think your approach is a smart thing to do. I don't know why you want to have your selection date in a table (as opposed to a parameter of a stored procedure), but if you want to stick to it, maybe you should break the query up into something
like this. The optimizer would still have to use heuristics (instead of more reliable estimates), but some unintended consequences could disappear.
Declare @min_date datetime
Set @min_date = (SELECT date FROM dateTable)
SELECT ...
FROM ...
WHERE SaleDate > @min_date
If you use a parameter (or an appropriate query hint), you will probably get performance close to your first case.
Gert-Jan

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

Date Performance issue

hi Guru's,
I am using 11.1.6.8 OBIEE. One of my report is having performance issue when i dig into that i found that the date filter not applied in the SQL generated to send DB, due to that it is doing table scan, But strange thing is that when it displaying data based on the Date range filter. It is only happening with the date dimension all other dimensions are working fine. I am not sure what it is missing.
Thanks In advance.
regards
Mohammed.

hi Saichand,
Thanks for taking time and looking into.
The filter is applied on the logical query but the physical query send to the DB is not having the filter. Due to that it is doing full table scan of the fact table and almost 30 minutes to display data. I am not sure why the physical query is not having the date filter. when i add the location or other type of filter it added to the Physical Query send to DB.
regards
@li

Row Level Security - Data filter - Roles Variable Not working in OBIEE 11.1.1.7.1

Hi all,
Previously, we were using OBIEE 11.1.1.5.0 and we were able to assign users to application roles by using the initialization block to assign the ROLES session variables.
1. My USER_SECURITY table in Oracle database:
USER_NAME | USER_ID | ROL
user1       | 1723    | GobalDataRole
user2       | 1739    | GobalDataRole
user3      | 1743    | GobalDataRole
2. The SQL query in my session initialization block:
select USER_NAME, USER_ID, ROL
from USER_SECURITY
where USERNAME = ':USER'
3. The row-wise initialization option is not checked.
4. In the Oracle Enterprise Manager Fusion Middleware Control, we created new application role: GobalDataRole and sync with rpd.
5. The GobalDataRole is used in the RPD to filter the data under permissions --> data filter. GobalDataRole only has access to Country A data.
6. Result: under my account, also in rpd Manage --> Sessions, user variable details
User_name , user_id & Rol variable is working fine as expected,
When we log in as user1, we can see in My Account, user assigned to: BI Consumers; Authenticated Role; GobalDataRole
When we log in as user2, we can see in My Account, user assigned to: BI Consumers; Authenticated Role; GobalDataRole
When we log in as user3, we can see in My Account, user assigned to: BI Consumers; Authenticated Role; GobalDataRole
User1, User2, and User3 are able to see the data correctly according the their data access setup.
Now, we using OBIEE 11.1.1.7.1 and using the same method, but we not able to assign users to application roles by using the initialization block to assign the ROLES session variables anymore.
Result:
User_name & user_id variable is working fine as expected, but the ROl variaible is not capturing the DB value,
When we log in as user1, we can see in My Account, user assigned to: BI Consumers; Authenticated Role
When we log in as user2, we can see in My Account, user assigned to: BI Consumers; Authenticated Role
When we log in as user3, we can see in My Account, user assigned to: BI Consumers; Authenticated Role
User1, User2, and User3 can see all data (which is wrong) because they are not assigned to the correct application role that sets the data restriction/filter.
Has anyone encountered the same issue? Any advice on how to solve this?
Thanks in advance!
Satheeshkumar P

Thanks user10615659   ,
- Yes the variable ROLES available in OBIEE 11.1.1.7.1
- Tested the init block and variables in offline rpd its working as expected.
- In online rpd, except ROLES and GROUP variable remaining variables working fine.
- Verified log file in both online and offline init block testing - the init block execution is successful.
Thanks

Data Filter in Data Selection -DM

Hi ALL,
I am facing problem in loading blank value data to BPC. Scenarion is
Account In BI has Hier as ACT_1
                                          ACT_2
                                         ACT_3
                                         ACT_4
                                         UNassigned - In data base it has balnk and when you report in BI you can see as #-(Un assigned as a text descrption)
in my data manager i need to select the or filter the accounts by Hier as shown above
i can select as ACT_1, ACT_4 but i need to select the blank value also i need to set the filters for unasigned but BPC data manager package will not allow the UNASSIGNED Value to be select.
Any idea on this can i handle some ho in transformation,
Thanks in advance
Regards
Ram

Hi,
Based on my test, Data filter does not lost when we re-open the file in Excel 2013. Thus, I think it is not a bug. Thus, please provide us more information to assist you better.
Did this issue occur with the previous file that created with Office 2010?
Have you tried to re-create a new file to test?
If this issue occur only with the previous file that created with Office 2010, this issue might be caused by the file compatibility, pleases use compatibility checker to update the files:
https://support.office.com/en-ca/article/Check-file-compatibility-with-earlier-versions-d9856881-5875-4c58-915f-06859b2943a7
If this issue occur with all files even with a new file, please try to repair Office 2013.
Hope it's helpful.
Thanks
George Zhao
Forum Support
Come back and mark the replies as answers if they help and unmark them if they provide no help.
If you have any feedback on our support, please click "[email protected]"

Date filter in preview

Hi there,
Can anyone help me to see the error of my ways with date filters when using Preview and Designer to create reports.
If I create a Excel 2013 workbook with date filter on Power View they appear as they do in Excel and the current version of Power BI (O365 Add on)... see first Pic below.
If I use the Power BI Designer, or create a Report in the Preview the only filter 'structure' applied to dates is the checkbox structure for each date, and it's not functional either as the list of dates only shows approximately 30 instead of each day for
the last 5 years (which is the content of the data)... see second pic below
I was expecting any date filters to show as per the first Pic in all cases.
Is this just a bug??
Expected to see (uploaded Excel 2013 Workbook):-
but we see this (using the same model from the uploaded workbook):
The Power Query has the column 'added' defined as a date.
Thanks,
Tim
Thank you for you time folks!

Hi Bruno, thanks for the reply to the post.
The issue here is the way in which the UI works with this amount of data. So there are 1600 dates I'm the model and the UI only shows a small list of the dates. And you can't change the filter 'type' to allow rhea selection for a range of dates
like you can in the Excel 2013 Power View. This is odd because when you upload the Excel created Power View the functionality exists in the Power BI UI.
The issue is when using a date as a filter you can't appear to select the type of filter to allow the entry of a date range. This just appears odd, or a bug?? i'm going to use the good old date dimension table to allow the selection but most end users
of Power BI won't have rhe knowledge or the skills to build star or snow flakes... therefore this seriously restricts functionality in my view...
Hope MS resolves soon...
Thanks again. tim
Thank you for you time folks!

Date Filter in 11g

Hi All
I Just upgraded my catalog and repository from 10g to 11g
Many of my answers where using a date filter CURRENT_DATE -1
In 11g this doesn't appear to work.
Formula syntax is invalid.
[nQSError: 10058] A general error has occurred. [nQSError: 43113] Message returned from OBIS. [nQSError: 22023] An arithmetic operation is being carried out on a non-numeric type. (HY000)
SQL Issued: SELECT CURRENT_DATE-1 FROM "LDW"
OK (Ignore Error)
If i just use CURRENT_DATE it works fine.
Any idea why? Is there another way to get this in 11g?
Thanks

Hi Experts,
i think this issue not at solved because we are in OBIEE 11.1.1.6.6 we are facing same issue CURRENT_DATE-1 This is a bug or what?.
10g why its not saying non-numeric type (10g working fine ) CURRENT_DATE-1.
any help appreciated...
Regrds
Raju.

Data filter in Excel 2013 disappears when Excel is reopened

I recently upgraded from Office 2010 to Office 2013. Unlike the previous versions of Excel, the data filter in Excel 2013 disappears. Save the Excel with filters applied, close and reopen
the file, filter is not retained. Even the filter mark is not to be seen. Not sure if its a bug,
but there are other tiny such bugs were encountered in 2013 Excel.

Hi,
Based on my test, Data filter does not lost when we re-open the file in Excel 2013. Thus, I think it is not a bug. Thus, please provide us more information to assist you better.
Did this issue occur with the previous file that created with Office 2010?
Have you tried to re-create a new file to test?
If this issue occur only with the previous file that created with Office 2010, this issue might be caused by the file compatibility, pleases use compatibility checker to update the files:
https://support.office.com/en-ca/article/Check-file-compatibility-with-earlier-versions-d9856881-5875-4c58-915f-06859b2943a7
If this issue occur with all files even with a new file, please try to repair Office 2013.
Hope it's helpful.
Thanks
George Zhao
Forum Support
Come back and mark the replies as answers if they help and unmark them if they provide no help.
If you have any feedback on our support, please click "[email protected]"

Date Filter Error

Hi,
I create a report (columnar) with date filter, but when i try use the filter this error ocurrs:
ADC Server exception in OpenViewset().
ADC Server exception in OpenViewset(). [ErrorSource="ActiveDataCache", ErrorID="ADCServerException"] ERROR [42000] [Microsoft][ODBC driver for Oracle][Oracle]ORA-00911: invalid character [ErrorSource="msorcl32.dll"]
The filter is "FIELD_DT is greater than 10/1/2009 12:00:00 AM".
The DO is vinculated a External Data Source, and the field used is datetime type.
I use BAM 10.1.3.3.0.
Please, help-me.

Hi,
It is difficult to say from error message whether the problem is due to filter or some other condition in the report. If you suspect it is filter, can you please create a simple Updating Ordered List on the dataobject you are using to see if works and when you find it working, add the exact filter on it and then we would know if filter has issues?
Thanks,
Vishal

Date filter is not working.

Dear Friends,
i have created reoport usinh below item but here when i enter date in :P452_BOOKING ,:P452_LOST date item then record does not filter but when i put date in ::P452_OPEN_DATE then recor is filter.How can i filtter with :P452_BOOKING ,:P452_LOST.
How can i search with date filter.
select CRM_SALES_DEAL.ID,
CRM_SALES_DEAL.ID as idd,
CRM_SALES_DEAL.SURNAME,
CRM_SALES_DEAL.DEAL_NAME,
CRM_SALES_DEAL.REFER_NO,
CRM_SALES_DEAL.CUSTOMER_TYPE,
CRM_SALES_DEAL.ACTIVE_FLG,
CRM_SALES_DEAL.DEAL_FLEX_13,
CRM_SALES_DEAL.DEAL_FLEX_14,
(select created_on from
CRM_SALES_ASSIGN_OPPORTUNITY where CRM_SALES_DEAL.id=deal_id and user_id=CRM_SALES_DEAL.assign_to) as creat
from CRM_SALES_DEAL
where
(:p452_find is null or
instr(upper("CRM_SALES_DEAL"."ID"),upper(:p452_find))>0 or
instr(upper("CRM_SALES_DEAL"."DEAL_NAME"),upper(:p452_find))>0 or
instr(upper("CRM_SALES_DEAL"."SURNAME"),upper(:p452_find))>0 )
AND
TO_DATE(TO_CHAR(CRM_SALES_DEAL.DEAL_FLEX_13,'DD-MON-YY'))=TO_DATE(:P452_BOOKING)
OR
TO_DATE(TO_CHAR(CRM_SALES_DEAL.DEAL_FLEX_14,'DD-MON-YY'))=TO_DATE(:P452_LOST)
OR
:P452_OPEN_DATE in (select TO_DATE(TO_CHAR(created_on ,'DD-MON-YY'))
from
CRM_SALES_ASSIGN_OPPORTUNITY where CRM_SALES_DEAL.id=deal_id and user_id=CRM_SALES_DEAL.assign_to))Where is issue.
Thanks
Edited by: Vedant on Nov 14, 2012 2:19 AM

Hello,
the first step should be not to rely on implicit conversion
TO_DATE(:P452_BOOKING)
TO_DATE(:P452_LOST)should be
TO_DATE(:P452_BOOKING,'DD-MON-YY')
TO_DATE(:P452_LOST,'DD-MON-YY')or whatever format you want to use.
TO_DATE(TO_CHAR(created_on,'DD-MON-YY'))This makes no sense. When created_on is a date column, then there is no use to convert it to character and back to date. If you do so to eliminate the time part, then use TRUNC(created_on) instead (same for DEAL_FLEX_13 and DEAL_FLEX_14).
Second: What does record does not filter mean, can you give us an example?
Regards
Marcus
Edited by: Marwim on 14.11.2012 11:31

BI Composer - Date filter is not working

Hi,
Bi Composer -
=========
1)
Date filter selection is not working in BI Composer? is anybody faced such issue?
error message: "java.lang.nullpointerexception"
2) BI Composer not working with https link (SSL)
error message "Invalid BIPS Connection"
I am using obiee11.1.1.6.0, IE8 ,windows
Thanks
Deva
Edited by: Devarasu on Aug 31, 2012 1:23 AM

Hi,
1) Raised SR with MOS team and created bug it's fixed feature 11.1.1.7 version
Bug 14635134 - BI COMPOSER - CAN'T BUILD FILTERS ON DATE COLUMNS
From bug 14205672 it looks like this may already be resolved in 11.1.1.7.
2) for error "Invalid BIPS Connection" we need to configure composer via FWM - EM then save it and then commit that changes. after tested it's working fine.
SR reference
SR 3-6209577211 : BI Composer - can't build filters on date columns
Thanks
Deva
Edited by: Devarasu on Oct 22, 2012 11:22 AM
Edited by: Devarasu on Oct 22, 2012 11:27 AM

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.

Date filter issue

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for