Different GroupBy & Aggregation rule on Facts

Hi All,
I'm facing the following problem.
I have DIM_TABLE and FACT_TABLE which joins with ROW_WID = ROW_WID. I want to implement a #FACT1 which is the SUM(FACT1), there's no problem over there. I also want to create a #FACT2 which is the MAX(FACT2) but grouped by the ROOT_ROW_WID instead of ROW_WID.
Any idea of how to resolve this issue?
Here's an example:
DIM_TABLE:
ROW_WID ROOT_ROW_WID ROOT_NAME ROOT_REGION
101 103 'ABC' 'AAA'
102 103 'ABC' 'AAA'
103 103 'ABC' 'AAA'
150 151 'ZZZ' 'AAA'
151 151 'ZZZ' 'AAA'
FACT_TABLE:
ROW_WID FACT1 FACT2
101 1 10
102 1 0
103 2 5
150 5 15
151 3 30
RESULT:
ROOT_REGION #FACT1 #FACT2
'AAA' 12 40 (it's 10 + 30)
Thanks in advance.

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

Similar Messages

Different Aggregation rule while aggregating

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

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

Substract as an aggregation rule for different level in a DIM ?!

Hi there..
I'm building a BI model based on financial transactions (incomes, expenses, etc..)
and my main problem is how to substract a measure, where the aggregation rule is set to SUM, for different levels in the "Account" dimension?
Example:
I have the "Account" dimension with the following hierarchy:
Account_ID / Account_name / Account_type / Account_total
And, lets say, 2 rows in it:
1.row in the "Account" dimension:
account_ID : 100
account_name : "Marketing expense"
account_type : "Variable expenses"
account_total : "Total profit" (total income - total Expenses)
2. row in the "Account" dimension:
account_ID : 200
account_name : "Financial incomes"
account_type : "Total incomes"
account_total : "Total profit" (total income - total Expenses)
"Total profit"
"Tot. incomes" "Tot. Expenses"
"Finan. incomes" "Market. expenses"
The fact table has just one measure: "Amount" and, of course, some foreign keys:
Account_ID -> "Account" dim
Organization_ID -> "Organization" dim
Date -> "Date" dim
Amount
The measure "Amount" in the fact table is positive both for expenses and incomes.
Now, what I'm trying to do is to sum up that measure on my top level in the "Account" dim.
At that level my report in Answers should substract "Total expenses" from "Total incomes"!
How can I do that?
thanks..
Ivan

Sorry to pop the obvious question, but can't you model that nicely and put it into distinct columns?
If not, you can create derived measures on you fact using "case when" statements. One for the incomes with amount > 0 (or >=0 ...depends on where you want to have the 0's) and one for the expenses with amount < 0.
HTH,
Chris

Math Calculation - Dividing Different Aggregated Rule

Is there a way to take a numeric value with an aggregated rule (Count) and divide the denominator value which has to have a aggregated rule (SUM)?
Edited by: NOTW_TEK22 on Mar 6, 2013 7:38 AM
Edited by: NOTW_TEK22 on Mar 6, 2013 7:39 AM

I was able to resolve my problem with the below formula: I was using a custom field not derived from an object in the data hub and an object that was in the data hub in this syntax.
CAST ("Revenue Metrics"."# of Open Opportunities" / "Revenue Metrics"."# of Opportunities" as float) * 100

How to define an aggregation rule for a dimension based on bridge table?

Hello,
I need a solution for aggregating data correctly when using a dimension based on a set of dimensione tables containing a bridge table. Please find below a description of my business case and the OBIEE model which I’ve created thus far.
Business Case
The company involved wants to report on the number of support cases, the different types of actions that were taken and the people involved in those actions. One support case will undergo a number of actions (called ‘handelingen’) until it is closed. For each action at least one person is involved performing a specific role, but there can also be multiple persons involved with 1 action, each performing a different role for that action. This is the N : N part of the model.
The problem that I face is visible in the two pictures below:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/sample.png
As long as I don’t include anything from the Dimension Meelezer in my report, I get the correct number of handelingen (7). When I include the person (called ‘Meelezer’), the measuere per action is multiplied by the number of persons/roles involved with that action.
When I changed the Aggregation rule in the report column #Handelingen to ‘Server Complex Aggregate’ I do get the correct endtotal:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/sample2.png
I believe it should be possible to define in the repository a different aggregation rule for individual dimensions, but I’ve not been able to achieve this.
Explained below is what I have created in my Physical and Business Model & Mapping layers:
The Physical Model is built like this:
(This is just a small part of a much larger physical model, but I’ve only included the most relevant tables)
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/PhysicalDiagram-1.png
The Fact table (ALS Feit Zaakverloop) contains FK’s for the action (FK_HANDELING, joined to ALS Dim Handeling), the date the action took place (FK_DATUM_ZAAKVERLOOP, joined to ALS Dim Datum Zaakverloop) and the uniqe group of people involved (FK_MEELEZERS, joined to ALS Groep Meelezers) and a measure column (SUM_HANDELINGEN) populated with the value ‘1’ for each row.
The Bridge table (ALS Brug Meelezer/Reden Meelezen) contains three FK’s: FK_GR_MEELEZERS (joined to ALS Groep Meelezers), FK_MEELEZER (joined to ALS Dim Functionaris) and FK_REDEN_MEELEZEN (joined to ALS Dim Reden Meelezen).
The Business Model
In the business model, the four physical tables for the N:N relation have been combined into one logical dimension table.
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/BusinessModel-1.png
DIM Meelezer contains one LTS in which the four physical tables have been combined:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/LTS1.png
And all the required locical columns have been created:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/LTS2.png
DIM Meelezer has also been identified as a bridge table and a Business Key has been defined on a combination of the FK’s in the bridge table and business codes of the two dimension tables.
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/BMDIM.png
Next a hierachy was created for Dim Meelezer:
http://i84.photobucket.com/albums/k24/The_Dutchman_2006/OBIEE/Hier.png
In Feit Zaakverloop, a measurement called ‘# Handelingen’ was created using SUM_HANDELINGEN, with an aggregation rule of SUM.
In the LTS of both the DIM Meelezer and Feit Zaakverloop, the Logical Content Levels have both been set to: LVL Detail – Meelezer.
Please provide suggestions that will NOT require changes to the physical datamodel as they would require too much time to achieve (or at leats would not be ready before my deadline.
Thanks!
Edited by: The_Dutchman on Dec 13, 2011 11:43 AM

Hmm, no replies yet...
Am I in 'uncharted territory' with this issue?

The reasoning behind aggregation rules at report level

Hello guys
I notice that in the answer criteria, we can define column formula of each columns in the request, but we can also set aggregation rules for the numeric columns..
I'd like to have a deeper understanding on how these settings work..
The Avg, Max, Min, Count are pretty clear and self-explanatory to me.
My main question is the difference between 'default', 'Server determined', 'complex server aggregate', and 'Sum'.
In a lot of the measure columns when the aggregate rule is 'default', when I do subtotaling in report views, I would actually get the right total amount by dimension columns, however there are also places in the report where the sub total is off, so I have to go and set the aggregate rule of that measure to 'Sum' then the total becomes correct 100%. When I try 'server determined', 'complex server aggregate', some measures change and some don't, but this is not in a pattern of change that I can understand the concept behind. The OBIEE documents said very little about this part
So is there more detailed information out there that explains more about what these options are doing?
Thanks in advance

Hi Shruthi,
To be clear you have one table 'DIM_LF_B' and its separated out as FACT and DIM in BMM layer with respective formulas ? If yes check this http://www.varanasisaichand.com/2012/04/fact-and-dimension-from-single-source.html
let me know if it is different
Thanks,
Saichand

Direct Database Request Aggregation Rule

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

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

Default Aggregation Rule

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

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

Which Aggregation Rule to be followed?

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

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

Mix source data with different granularity into the same fact table?

I have two transaction tables "Incident (157 columns)" and "Unit (70 Colums)". For every "Incident" that happens there could be one or more records in the "Unit" table.
As part of my data mart design, I have merged both the tables into a single Fact "Incident Fact (227 Columns)" and inserted the records from both the tables with a join condition between them [incident.IN_NUM = Unit.IN_NUM].
Is this correct, is my question? or am I mixing source data with different granularity in the same fact table. Appreciate your help.
Best Regards
Bees

Bees,
Are the measures from 'Incident' , repeated for a given incident where it has more than one record in the Unit table ? If so, then the sum(indicent.measure) will give an incorrect result, no ?
What requirement is there to physically merge the tables together outside of OBIEE? With OBIEE you could have one logical 'fact' table to present to report users, which sourced from seperate Incidents and Units tables and would stop the incorrect aggregations occuring. A common modelling piece in the same way would be Order Headers and Order Lines, quite common in OBIEE to have a logical 'Orders' fact which contained both Order header measures and Order line measures, this translates to your Incidents -> Units relationship.
To do what I've mentioned, is relatively straight forward, you need a 'Dim - Incident' with two levels, Incident and Unit, mapp the unique identifiers in as the level keys and then use these levels to set the content levels correctly in your 2 logical tables sources for logical 'Fact' , ie Incidents LTS at incident level, Units LTS as units level.
Hope this helps, let us know if you get stuck.
Cheers
Alastair

EDIT AGGREGATION RULE IN ANSWER FOR A MEASURE

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

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

Define custom made aggregation rules

Hi,
If I edit a column formula in Answers, many different aggregation rules (sum, average, count etc) are availabe. However, it doesn't seem possible to define my own aggregation rule, somelike "SUM(revenue)/9". Isn't this possible?
TIA!
Edited by: Erik on 28-Mar-2011 14:44

In answers we can give sum(revenue)/9 but it shows the same result for all the rows.If u r having any other column in the criteria ie dimension the give like this
Sum(revenue by dimension)/9

Unexpected result in BIEE when applying aggregation rule

Hi All
I am getting one problem in BI Answer.
Suppose I have one column and I have applied some aggregation rule on it let say sum. when I am selecting this column with some other column then it is giving me correct result but If I again select this column means second time then it is giving me wrong answer that i dont understand.
So can any one tell me what will be the possible error in that case. is there may be some mapping problem or other.
Thanks
Siddhartha P

Hi Vency
Still I am getting same error. Let me explain my Details
I have one table which have 4 column site_id, equipment_id, item_id and rate. and some other table that are master tables for site equipment and item in which they have Id and Name for all. one table is fact table which is production_date tabel whcih cantains many column including site_id, equipment_id, item_id and some more column. I have mapped all the column in physical table and in BMM every column is joined with fact table. And this rate column i have Drag and drop in fact table and applyed SUM Aggregation rule on it. now If I select SITE_NAME EQUIPMENT NAME ITEM NAME from master table and selected rate then it is showing wrong answer.
As I think the problem with some mapping. because if I select ID's of all the column then it is showing correct result but if I select Name then it is showing wrong answer.
Or In some cases If I select first time this column then it is showing correct answer but if I select Second time then it is showing wrong answer.
Thanks
Siddhartha P

Edit formula Aggregation rule?

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

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

Aggregation rules for calculations

Hi
I have a calculation (logical column) Z as X*Y and I want Z to be an average at different levels in hierachy. How do I do it in OBIEE?

Hi Siddharth,
Specifying Aggregation rule for a column in Admin Tool and applying Formula for a column in Answers work differently.
We usually specify Aggregation rule in Admin tool to implement the calculation measures. So, it will be used along with the logical levels.
Where as specifying Formula for a column in Answers works for that particular Request only..
Comes to its Significance...
Take the general example... Sales by Country, Region, District and City
To calculate the total sales Country, Region, District and City wise we specify aggregation rule as SUM for the Amount column..
In order to calculate the logical level wise details we use Aggregations..i.e., Measures..
For last question, is your saying the use of 'Use Existing Logical columns as the Source'..
In this case, I think it is not possible to specify the Aggregation rule in Admin tool.
-Vency

Different GroupBy & Aggregation rule on Facts

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for