Function and column

Hi All,
I have a function and a column with same name. No parameter passing into the function but function return type is number. I have a column name same as function name and datatype also number. In my query i want to use the return result of function when i am selecting from the table which have the column.
Can any body tell me how to do. Both are in same user.
Thanks in Advance
Rk

I've always known the French were weird, but shift for a period?That's not all, its shift for all the numbers too and a bunch of letters are swapped.
http://www.forlang.wsu.edu/help/kfrench.gif
I first used unix and vi on a French system, spent all my time looking down at the keyboard and couldn't understand why I kept deleting the wrong character when switching from insert to edit mode after making a typo of which there were plenty.
Finally I caught the cursor moving back one space when in edit mode, I have hated vi ever since.

Similar Messages

OBIEE UI Interface is missing prompt functionality and Column Selector

Hi,
OBIEE UI Interface is missing prompt functionality and Column Selector in Answers when creating a report. This problem occurs on all the reports. Also the problem occurs in firefox too. Could you please suggest me any suggestion to overcome this issue.
Thanks and Regards

May sound stupid, but do you have the Privileges to add these things to a report? These features can be turned on/off from the Privilege Administration Screen, for a group or user. Have a look.
Cheers,
A.

How to use, Case function and Filter in Column Formula?

Hello All,
I am using case function and also would like to filter value to populate.
Below is showing error :
case
when '@{Time}' = 'Year' then "Time"."Fiscal Year"
when '@{Time}' = 'Quarter' then "Time"."Fiscal Quarter"
when '@{Time}' = 'Month' then FILTER ("Time"."Fiscal Period" USING "Time"."Fiscal Period" NOT LIKE 'A%')
else ifnull('@{Time}','Selection Failed') end
Thanks, AK

when '@{Time}' = 'Month' then FILTER ("Time"."Fiscal Period" USING "Time"."Fiscal Period" NOT LIKE 'A%')I dont think Filter this works here or any other data types except number.
Try to use option Column's->Filter->Advanced->Convert this filter to SQL
If helps mark

Excel function and ev function not working in static column key

I have created a evdre report and I notice that when I tried to use any excel function and ev functions in the static column key cell to get the value for that cell, it's not working.
e.g I have Col key define as:
ColKeyRange Sheet!&$J$12:$N$14
In K13 which is key id for time. I define is as = $K$10 where K10 is the time value from current view, it not working,the value is still K13 = $K$10. then I tried to use EVCVW function to replace K10, it also not working, but I use the same function in the description of the ID underneath, both of the are working, Any thought?
Edited by: DFW on Feb 9, 2010 7:33 PM

Hi,
That was exactly what I meant. They just dont work on the green ID areas or the yellow data region. Few days back even I tried that, but didnt work. So, I followed the different approach. I dont remember about the dynamic templates. Are you sure that the functions were written in the green ID region?
I remember this used to work fine in the MS version. However, in the NW version, even I am not able to make them work.
Edited by: nilanjan chatterjee on Feb 9, 2010 9:38 PM

Oracle function and query return different results

Hi, I am using oracle 10g database.
Function is :
create or replace FUNCTION FUNC_FAAL(myCode number,firstDate date
*, secondDate date)*
RETURN INTEGER as
rtr integer;
BEGIN
select count() into rtr*
from myschema.my_table tbl where tbl.myDateColumn between firstDate and
secondDate and tbl.kkct is null and tbl.myNumberColumn = myCode ;
return (rtr);
END FUNC_FAAL;
This function returns 117177 as result.
But if I run same query in the function seperately ;
select count()*
from myschema.my_table tbl
where tbl.myDateColumn between firstDate and secondDate
and tbl.kkct is null and tbl.myNumberColumn = myCode ;
I get different result 11344 (which is the right one).
Table and function are in the same schema.
What can be the problem ?
Thanks.

1. i think ur parameter name and Column names are same Firstdate and seconddate try to choose different name
2. try using Trunc function around your dates
where trunc(tbl.myDateColumn) between trunc(firstDate) and trunc(secondDate)then compare the result....sometimes time elements comes into play.
Baig
[My Oracle Blog|http://baigsorcl.blogspot.com/]

Question regarding Dashboard and column prompt

My question regarding Dashboard and column prompt:
1) Dashboard prompt usually work with only for columns which are in subject area. In my report I've created some of the columns which are based on other columns. Like I've daysNumber column that is based on two other columns, as it calculates the difference of two dates. When I create dashboard prompt I can't find this column there. I need to make a prompt on this column.
2)For one of the column I've only two values 1 and 0. When I create prompt for this column, is it possible that in drop down list It shows 'Yes' for 1 and 'No' for 0 and still filter the request??

Hi Toony,...
I think there was another way of doing this...
In the dashboard prompt go to Show option > select SQL Results from dropdown.
There you need to write your Logical SQL like...
SELECT CASE WHEN 1=0 THEN PERIODS.YEAR ELSE difference of date functionality END FROM SubjectAreaName
Here.. Periods.Year is the column which is already exists in repository's presentation layer..
and difference of date functionality is the code or formula of column which you want to show in drop-down...
Also write the CASE WHEN 1=0 THEN PERIODS.YEAR ELSE difference of date functionality END code in fx of that prompt.
I think it helps you in doing this..
Just check and inform me if it works...
Thanks & Regards
Kishore Guggilla
Edited by: Kishore Guggilla on Oct 31, 2008 9:35 AM

Filter Function in Column Formula is not working properly

Hi,
I am using Filter Function in Column formula tab in Answers to calculate the Total sum from the start of the Fiscal month to the Month selected from the Prompt.
My requirement is I have total sales column. Now I need to calculate TYYTD kind of thing for which I cant use the Time sereis due to my report constraint.
Instead of that I am using this Filter function on TYYTD column where i am giving the filter as start of the Fiscal month to the month selected from the Prompt.
For example if I select May month from the Prompt then this TYYTD column should give me SUM(Total Sales) between Feb and May for which I am using the Filter Function. But it giving me only May sales whcih is same as Total Sales column.
Can anyone throw some light on this as this is very important for us or any alternate solution other than Time sereis measures.
Did anyone got this kind of issue with Filter Function?
Regards,
Azad

Ok...here's the steps to fix this as efficiently as possible. I have a whole bunch of mailboxes under "On My Mac" and they have a bunch of mailboxes nested in them. I get my messages into Apple Mail via IMAP. (I don't know if this matters.) The steps below assume you have a similar setup.
1. Hold the Option key down and click the dropdown arrow next to each mailbox that has one. This will cause all nested mailboxes below it to appear.
2. Go to the top of the list of mailboxes under "On My Mac" and highlight the first mailbox. Then hold the Shift key down and highlight the last mailbox in the list. This will cause all of the mailboxes and nested mailboxes to be highlighted.
3. From the menu, select "Mailbox --> Rebuild" and the rebuild process will start.
4. Watch the top of the mail screen to see the message count change as the mailboxes are being rebuilt. Wait until the activity stops before doing the next step.
5. As the mailboxes were rebuilt, many messages were reset as "Unread" even though every message was previously "Read." Make sure the mailboxes you want to affect are still highlighted. Right-click and select "Mark All Messages Read."
That fixed the problem for me.

Is it possible to switch the rows and columns?

Is it possible to switch the rows and columns of a table? The reason I ask is that it would be easier for me to input the data with the number at the top of a column and the fields going down. But it would be easier to read the data with the number on the left and the fields going to the right. Is it possible to switch a table in this way?

mahongue wrote:
Is it possible to switch the rows and columns of a table? The reason I ask is
that it would be easier for me to input the data with the number at the top
of a column and the fields going down. But it would be easier to read the
data with the number on the left and the fields going to the right. Is it
possible to switch a table in this way?
It sounds to me as though you wish to transpose a table so that the original is changed from rows to columns and from columns to rows, as in the following:
Table 1
    A   B   C
========
1   o   p   q
2   r   s   t
3   u   v   w
Table 2
    A   B   C
========
1   o   r   u
2   p   s   v
3   q   t   w
You are right - it would be nice to have a menu item to magically transpose a selected block of cells. But there isn't one. So...
One way to solve this is to use the index() and transpose() functions to accomplish row and column cell transposition. If you are going to use a 1:1 cell correspondence and change the header columns and rows also, you can use this:
   =INDEX(TRANSPOSE(Table # :: <range>),ROW(),COLUMN())
where Table # and <range> is substituted as in the following fashion:
   =INDEX(TRANSPOSE(Table 1 :: $A$1:$C$3),ROW(),COLUMN())
Create a second table. Copy the modified formula above with the appropriate substitutions, select the range you wish to have your transposition inserted into (must match the transposed cell dimensions of the original range), paste the forumula and voila! the cells will be transposed.
Cautions:
o The target table must match the swapped cell length and width dimension. For example, if the original data range is 6 columns wide by 4 rows deep, then the corresponding table or range to hold the transposition must be 4 columns wide by 6 rows deep.
o If your transposed data block is to be offset from the origin of the new table, then you will need to include a subtractive offset into your cell formula, since in the transpose() function the data in the master data range is referenced from its position with the master range, not its cell position in the table. Such an offset is necessary because this example formula uses the target row and column numbers to arrive at indexed positions.
For example, if the new data range is to be offset one column to the right and one row below from the target table's origin then you must subtract (-1) from the cell and from the column references in the formula:
  Example:
  =INDEX(TRANSPOSE(Table 3 :: $B$2:$D$4),ROW()-1,COLUMN()-1)
If someone has a better solution I'd be glad to hear of it.

Sql query slowness due to rank and columns with null values:


Sql query slowness due to rank and columns with null values:
I have the following table in database with around 10 millions records:
Declaration:
create table PropertyOwners (
[Key] int not null primary key,
PropertyKey int not null,
BoughtDate DateTime,
OwnerKey int null,
GroupKey int null
go
[Key] is primary key and combination of PropertyKey, BoughtDate, OwnerKey and GroupKey is unique.
With the following index:
CREATE NONCLUSTERED INDEX [IX_PropertyOwners] ON [dbo].[PropertyOwners]
[PropertyKey] ASC,
[BoughtDate] DESC,
[OwnerKey] DESC,
[GroupKey] DESC
go
Description of the case:
For single BoughtDate one property can belong to multiple owners or single group, for single record there can either be OwnerKey or GroupKey but not both so one of them will be null for each record. I am trying to retrieve the data from the table using
following query for the OwnerKey. If there are same property rows for owners and group at the same time than the rows having OwnerKey with be preferred, that is why I am using "OwnerKey desc" in Rank function.
declare @ownerKey int = 40000
select PropertyKey, BoughtDate, OwnerKey, GroupKey
from (
select PropertyKey, BoughtDate, OwnerKey, GroupKey,
RANK() over (partition by PropertyKey order by BoughtDate desc, OwnerKey desc, GroupKey desc) as [Rank]
from PropertyOwners
) as result
where result.[Rank]=1 and result.[OwnerKey]=@ownerKey
It is taking 2-3 seconds to get the records which is too slow, similar time it is taking as I try to get the records using the GroupKey. But when I tried to get the records for the PropertyKey with the same query, it is executing in 10 milliseconds.
May be the slowness is due to as OwnerKey/GroupKey in the table can be null and sql server in unable to index it. I have also tried to use the Indexed view to pre ranked them but I can't use it in my query as Rank function is not supported in indexed
view.
Please note this table is updated once a day and using Sql Server 2008 R2. Any help will be greatly appreciated.

create table #result (PropertyKey int not null, BoughtDate datetime, OwnerKey int null, GroupKey int null, [Rank] int not null)Create index idx ON #result(OwnerKey ,rnk)
insert into #result(PropertyKey, BoughtDate, OwnerKey, GroupKey, [Rank])
select PropertyKey, BoughtDate, OwnerKey, GroupKey,
RANK() over (partition by PropertyKey order by BoughtDate desc, OwnerKey desc, GroupKey desc) as [Rank]
from PropertyOwners
go
declare @ownerKey int = 1
select PropertyKey, BoughtDate, OwnerKey, GroupKey
from #result as result
where result.[Rank]=1
and result.[OwnerKey]=@ownerKey
go
Best Regards,Uri Dimant SQL Server MVP,
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/uri_dimant/
MS SQL optimization: MS SQL Development and Optimization
MS SQL Consulting:
Large scale of database and data cleansing
Remote DBA Services:
Improves MS SQL Database Performance
SQL Server Integration Services:
Business Intelligence

Few questions about sql2008 functions and commands

hello,
I am learning sql2008 implementation and maintenance,I am just 2 weeks bussy.there is some questions in my mind wich I can't answer it.
1-when I can use USE MASTER statement
2-can a database for example (test) have many and unlimmited file groups?
3-what is the diferrence between file and filegroup! is the term of file means tables in filegroup?
4-with boundary points does mean the data type when creating partition function!
5`what is diferrence between full text index and index,where you have to use the index and wher you have to use full text index?
6-each filegroup must have one partition or one partition can have many filegroups in partition scheme!
7-do you have to partition every scheme or not! where do you have to partition a scheme and where not?
8-can you give a little example with switch operator!
9-again do you have to partition every table and index in the real world or not!
thanks
johan
h.david

Hi,
Let me try to answer your questions:
You need to use USE MASTER whenever you need to do some work in the MASTER database and the database context is not that.
Yes, a database can have many filegroups. Please check this article:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179316.aspx
Please check this article:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms179316.aspx
As per BOL:
boundary_value is a constant expression that can reference variables. This includes user-defined type variables, or functions and user-defined functions. It cannot reference Transact-SQL expressions.
boundary_value must either match or be implicitly convertible to the data type supplied in
input_parameter_type, and cannot be truncated during implicit conversion in a way that the size and scale of the value does not match that of its corresponding
input_parameter_type. For more details check
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187802.aspx
For simplicity: Full-Text index is used to search in a LOB/text data in a column, index is used to speed up your queries. Please check these articles:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms142571.aspx,
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms189271.aspx
As per BOL: When you create a partition scheme, you define the filegroups where the table partitions are mapped, based on the parameters of the partition function. You must specify enough filegroups to hold the number of partitions. You can specify that
all partitions map to a different filegroup, that some partitions map to a single filegroup, or that all partitions map to a single filegroup. You can also specify additional, "unassigned" filegroups in the event you want to add more partitions later. For
more info, please check
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms188730.aspx
8. Please read the concept of partitioning here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms190199.aspx and for SWITCH operator, please check the sliding window example at here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa964122(SQL.90).aspx
9. It depends :) but you always will have at least 1 partition!
I hope it helps.
J.
There are 10 type of people. Those who understand binary and those who do not.

Numbers' Functions and Formulas in Multiple Cells, Tables, and Sheets

Hello,
I'm stuck with specifics that center around usage, and I get the funny feeling I'm overlooking a simple detail or two.
If I may, here goes.
I'm working with a single spreadsheet that has several sheets within it, and each sheet has an identical table. Each table is used to record various data, and I use an additional table in a separate sheet to consolidate some of the information, so that I can track results, at a glimpse, by looking at averages, totals, etc.
Each data table is organized for consolidation by tracking wins, ties, or losses. It is important to know that each data table only records a single win, tie, or loss along with its other applicable data. And on the actual consolidation table I am trying to tally specific data fields by the use of Numbers' functions and formulas, yet I wish to keep these tallied results organized by the determining factor of whether or not they were gathered from a table that recorded a win, a table that recorded a tie, or a table with a loss.
To illustrate, each table contains data fields that record start time, finish time, elapsed time, the day of the week, etc. Let's say I have eight tables, and the first two are winning tables, three more are tables that record a tie, and the last three are losing tables. For example, on my consolidated data table I wish to enter a function and formula capturing which of the eight tables are wins, ties, and losses so that I can, at a glance, see how much time elapsed to obtain the wins, ties, and losses. So then, in this example, for wins I want to determine which of those wins took 20 minutes, or which of them took 15 minutes, etc. So then, out of the two wins, let's say both of them took 20 minutes each. I need the numeral 2 to be counted and recorded on the consolidation table since only two tables match the criteria. And I would do the same for all remaining data fields (e.g., start time, finish time, etc.). Just so long as everything is determined by wins, ties, and losses, and then organized by the respective data fields. Simply put, this example determines a total of two wins that meet the data field requirement of 20 minutes. Out of the eight tables (one table per sheet) any other wins would then be organized according to the specific data in the elapsed time data field on it's data table (e.g., 5 minutes, 15 minutes, etc.).
The exact syntax structure of the functions and formula I'm unsuccessfully using follows below. It only seems to return a result of 1, and I think it is returning this value from the IF Statements. By the way, the Win, Tie, or Loss cell in each data table is cell formatted as a pop-up so I can either select None or 1. But in this example I'm basing this on the time period of 20 minutes, and out of the eight data tables I have two wins which also record the time period as 20 minutes, so I should see 2 and not 1 in the 20 minutes column of the consolidated data table. Also, I tried changing the syntax where I would type "=1" in the IF Statements, but it returned a result of =1, and if I don't include the equals sign and quotation marks the result just shows up as 1.
My Syntax:
IF(Trade 1::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Win', 1, IF(Trade 2::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Win',1, IF(Trade 3::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Win',1, IF(Trade 4::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Win',1, IF(Trade 5::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Win',1, IF(Trade 6::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Win',1, IF(Trade 7::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Win',1, IF(Trade 8::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Win',1, IF(COUNTIFS(Trade 1::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Time in Trade (in minutes)', "=20m")+COUNTIFS(Trade 2::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Time in Trade (in minutes)', "=20m")+COUNTIFS(Trade 3::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Time in Trade (in minutes)', "=20m")+COUNTIFS(Trade 4::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Time in Trade (in minutes)', "=20m")+COUNTIFS(Trade 5::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Time in Trade (in minutes)', "=20m")+COUNTIFS(Trade 6::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Time in Trade (in minutes)', "=20m")+COUNTIFS(Trade 7::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Time in Trade (in minutes)', "=20m")+COUNTIFS(Trade 8::'Data Recorded (1)' '* Time in Trade (in minutes)'))))))))))
Please bear in mind that the COUNTIFS portion of the above syntax structure is something I'm already successfully using to count the totals of other things not mentioned above, and I'm hesitant to delete it since it already works to my satisfaction when I want to, for example, determine the total number of overall wins. So, just for illustration purposes, I might have an overall wins column in my consolidation table that records how many wins there are, regardless of organization by elapsed time, or any other data field. In other words, the COUNTIFS syntax structure already works to my satisfaction. I'm not sure if it's possible to alter it so that it isn't so long, but what's there does work just when counting total numbers, as just mentioned.
In summary, I'm wondering which function I can use with the COUNTIFS function to determine which of my eight data tables are winning tables, but break those wins down further based on criteria like elapsed time, and in the above example the time elapsed is 20 minutes. As you may see above, I'm unsuccessfully using the IF function. Finally, I've looked at the function browser descriptions of things like LOOKUP, HLOOKUP, VLOOKUP, INTERSECT.RANGES, and a few others. And so far I haven't made good use of any of them the way I've done when I use the COUNTIFS function by itself when only counting overall totals. But now I must determine totals that meet certain criteria, as explained above.
Please help if you dare (smile). This is a huge project I'm undertaking, and so as not to cause confusion I have not included all of the details. But rather, I've taken a small sampling and set it to the side for experimentation. If this small sample works out to my satisfaction I can simply copy and paste the syntax in all other respective cells in the consolidation table, changing only reference locations, and perhaps conditions or values. One thing is certain, I don't intend on giving up on it.
Thank you for your time and advice.
Blessings!
Message was edited by: solo68
Added image.

I'd like to edit the last paragraph of my second posting, but for some reason an entirely new posting is being created when I attempt to do this. So when reading this post, please use it to replace only the last paragraph of my second post containing the four inserted images.
Last paragraph begins:
In closing, I need each cell in each column of each row in my consolidation table to remain as is. I have my reasons for doing this, and they all serve a specific purpose. The only exception would be the formatting of the last three rows as footer rows. Most importantly, and I should have made this abundantly clear earlier, my apologies, I need a single function and formula in cell E7 of my consolidation table that will firstly determine which data tables are winning tables while secondly and simultaneously counting which of those winning tables have elapsed times of 20 minutes. Perhaps, now this better explains why my syntax is written the way it is written. In the example I provided, if the proper function and formula were written it would result as 2 in cell E7 in my consolidation table. If there is anything else specific you need of me in order to assist me, please request it. Thank you.
Last paragraph ends:
Additionally, to t quinn:
First off, thank you for returning to assist me. I really do appreciate your efforts. Please be aware that I'm avoiding going into details about each and every portion of my spreadsheet because I wish to avoid discussion that is off topic. As I stated earlier, I'm new to using these features of Numbers. My spreadsheet encompasses a much larger amount of data than I'm referring to in the example in my first post. But in my example I'm isolating just the information concerning what I'm now trying to accomplish to finish my spreadsheet project. Moreover, most of what I've done up to this point I was able to figure out on my own, or get help from watching videos on YouTube, or simply using the application help menu. Please be aware that I consulted all of these, repeatedly. I even contacted AppleCare, and was told this sort of support is not available. In spite of this, I've accomplished a great deal in my first large spreadsheet project. Please be aware that when I wrote my second post and specifically responded to you, I didn't want to be rude or ungrateful, and I still don't, but maybe the suggestions you and Hiroto made about gathering the count of wins, ties, and losses are something I've already done. I think I've done that separately. These counts are already in separate cells, and they are working fine. In my first post where I inserted only one image you can see examples of this in my consolidation table image, in cells B3 and E6. I apologize for not making this abundantly clear earlier. Furthermore, the portion of my syntax that shows the COUNTIFS is the exact way I accomplished this, and it is written the way it is written because I need separate sheets, each with their own data tables. Again, in cell E7 I need to determine which of the eight data tables that record wins are also recording 20 minutes, but I need this in a single function and formula with the result appearing only in cell E7. Once this is figured out I will adjust the syntax to do the same thing with every column (these are not shown but they exist) in my consolidation table for the last three footer rows, named Win Column Totals, Tie Column Totals, and Loss Column Totals. The last three rows being footer rows may not be necessary, and if so, I can convert them back to normal rows. Nonetheless, my consolidation table is counting the totals of all data in all data tables. This much I've already accomplished. Now I have one last function and formula I'm working on in order to determine which of the eight data tables record wins, ties, or losses while it simultaneously counts which of the wins, ties, or losses fall within certain categories like elapsed time, and this will be shown on my consolidation table only in the last three rows. Yes, I've gotten the total wins counted, and separately counted the total number of times 20 minutes was the elapsed time used, but so far, just looking at my consolidation table I don't know if the total number of times 20 minutes was used was with a win, tie, or loss. That's what I need to know now. Everything else is already accomplished. So then my consolidation table will show the totals for all data fields in my eight data tables as illustrated in cells B3 and E6. The last three rows of my consolidation table will break this down in a single function and formula with one row for wins, a second for ties, and a third for losses. And each of these respective last three rows will in the same function and formula determine if the win, tie, or loss also is one of the data fields in my eight data tables. How? By the use of columns in my consolidation table. Remember, each of my eight data tables are identical. In the example in my first post I only used one data field, elapsed time (Time in Trade), to illustrate in one column on my consolidation table what I'm trying to accomplish with all of the columns not shown in my consolidation table. Once this is figured out I can adjust it to complete the remainder of the consolidation table. Thank you, t quinn.
To all reading this and attempting to offer assistance, if for any reason I'm still not explaining myself clearly, please continue to ask me more specific questions. I realize it's hard to communicate this way, and if Apple allowed us to upload the actual spreadsheet it would make this entire forum a better place to communicate. But that's going off topic, so let's simply focus on the matter at hand. Thank you.
Blessings!

Displaying the Row and Column number in the report

I am trying to show row and column number in the report (not just web preview). I am using Hyperion Reports Version 7.2.5.168

use a formula column/row. use RANK function in that. (e.g. Rank([A], asc) will sort the rows based on column A values in ascending order)
you can use this rank in your heading.
But frankly this is not so easy. You have to do it in a very intelligent way, so that rank gives you column number/row number any how.
Have a try and let see if you find a appropriate solution.
Regards,
Rahul

Report with multiple dimensions in Row and Column with EvEXP

Hi
We are currently running BPC 7.0 SP3 and try to create the report(or schedule) with more 2 x 2 dimensions in the row and column.
e.g.
row dimension : Outer row is Entity, Inner row is Account
column dimension : Outer column is Time, Inner row is Category
We created the report with 2 x 2 dimensions like above e.g. with EvEXP and EvNXP, NOT EvDRE
based on default dynamic template:Template13.xlt(Nested Row, 2 x 1 dimensions defined by EvEXP and EvNXP formula).
However, when expanding the dimension with double click these dimensions or change CV of the report with 2 x 2 dimensions defined by EvEXP and EvNXP formula,
error occurs on EvEXP and EvNXP formula and can't retrieve the result correctly.
[Question]
Can't we create the report with more 2 x 2 dimensions in the row and column using EvEXP and EvNXP function ?
We understand that we can make the report with more 2 x 2 dimensions in the row and column if using EvDRE.
Thank You in advance
Kenya

Thank you for your advice.
I understand that we should use EvDRE when creating the report with multiple dimension in the row/column　because EvEXP have some erros, poor performance, etc.
Then, we have two questions.
1)
>plus they had some errors in the designs.
what kind of errors they have as an example?
2)
>If you must build the EVEXP and EVNXP, I would suggest building the template from scratch
We built the simple template with just 2 x 2 dimension from scratch.
But this report doesn't work well when double-click the dimension or changing CV...
Would you please check the following template?
<https://sapmats-de.sap-ag.de/download/download.cgi?id=RCZE1ME4YSORY3DCDO4NNMANZLBL1L5ZBUOB2F71YVNVS8XDJW>
It would be greatly appreciated if you could give me your advice for the template.
Thank you again
And my best regards,
Kenya

Wrapped in a function and/or stored procedure, recursive CTE stops working

This query builds an hierarchical tree from a single table with the typical
value/reports_to_value columns.
When running in SQL manager returns like 7 records (note i'm avoiding infinite
loop by blocking top level value)
WITH c
AS
SELECT deptid, reports_to_dept
FROM glo_tree
WHERE deptid = '18538'
UNION ALL
SELECT t.deptid, t.reports_to_dept
FROM glo_tree T
INNER JOIN c
ON t.deptid = c.reports_to_dept
where t.deptid <> '00001'
SELECT deptid
FROM c
However, the exact same query, if wrapped in a function and/or stored procedure,
returns 0 records (no error message whatsoever)
CREATE FUNCTION [dbo].[checkDept] (@deptid varchar(16))
RETURNS TABLE
AS
RETURN
WITH c
AS
SELECT deptid, reports_to_dept
FROM glo_tree
WHERE deptid = @deptid
UNION ALL
SELECT t.deptid, t.reports_to_dept
FROM glo_tree T
INNER JOIN c
ON t.deptid = c.reports_to_dept
SELECT deptid
FROM c
GO
CREATE PROCEDURE [dbo].[getDept] (@deptid varchar(16))
AS
SELECT deptid
FROM dbo.checkDept(@deptid)
Then call them like:
select * FROM checkDept('18538')exec getDept @deptid='18538'
Both return nothing

Thanks Patrick, i don't think it can do that, i call it like:
select * FROM checkDept('18538')exec getDept @deptid='18538'Just to make sure, i've changed the function like:WHERE ltrim(rtrim(deptid)) = @deptidStill the same thing

OWB bugs, missing functionality and the future of OWB

I'm working with OWB for some time now and there are a lot of rough edges to discover. Functionality and stability leave a lot to be desired. Here's a small and incomplete list of things that annoy me:
Some annoying OWB bugs (OWB 10g 10.1.0.2.0):
- The debugger doesn't display the output parameters of procedures called in pre-mapping processes (displays nothing, treats values as NULL). The mapping itself works fine though.
- When calling selfmade functions within an expression OWB precedes the function call with a constant "Functions." which prevents the function from being executed and results in an error message
- Occasionally OWB cannot open mappings and displays an error message (null pointer exception). In this case the mapping cannot be opened anymore.
- Occasionally when executing mappings OWB doesn't remember changes in mappings even when the changes were committed and deployed
- When using aggregators in mappings OWB scrambles the order of the output attributes
- The deployment of mappings sometimes doesn't work. After n retries it works without having changed anything in the mapping
- When recreating an external table directly after dropping the table OWB recreates the external table but always displays both an error message and a success message.
- In Key Lookups the screen always gets garbled when selecting an attribute as a join condition
- Usage of constants results in aborts in the debugger
- When you reconcile a table used in a key lookup the lookup condition sometimes changes. OWB seems to remember only the position of the lookup condition attribute but not the name.
- In the process of validating a mapping often changes in the mapping get lost and errors occur like 'Internal Errors' or 'Null Pointer Exceptions'.
- When you save the definition of external tables OWB always adds 2 whitespace columns to the beginning of all the lines following 'ORGANISATION EXTERNAL'. If you save a lot of external table definitions you get files with hundreds of leading whitespaces.
Poor or missing functionality:
- No logging on the level of single records possible. I'd like the possibility to see the status of each single record in each operator like using 'verbose data' in PowerCenter
- The order of the attributes cannot be changed. This really pisses me off expecially if operators like the aggregator scramble the order of attributes.
- No variables in expressions possible
- Almost unusable lookup functionality (no cascading lookups, no lookup overrides, no unconnected lookups, only equal condition in key lookups)
- No SQL overrides in soruces possible
- No mapplets, shared containers or any kind a reusable transformations
- No overview functionality for mappings. Often it's very hard to find a leftover operator in a big mapping.
- No copy function for attributes
- Printing functionality is completely useless
- No documentation functionality for mappings (reports)
- Debugger itself needs debugging
- It's very difficult to mark connections between attributes of different operations. It's almost impossible to mark a group of connections without marking connections you don't want to mark.
I really wonder which of the above bugs and mssing functionality 'Paris' will address. From what I read about 'Paris' not many if at all. If Oracle really wants to be a competitor (with regard to functionality) to Informatica, IBM/Ascential etc. they have a whole lot of work to do or purchase Informatica or another of the leading etl tool
vendors.
What do you think about OWB? Will it be a competitor for the leading etl tools or just a cheap database add on and become widely used like SAB BW not for reasons of technology or functionality but because it's cheap?
Looking forward to your opinions.
Jörg Menker

Thanks to you two for entertaining my thoughts so far. Let me respond to you latest comments.
Okay, lets not argue which one is better.. when a tool is there .. then there are some reasons to be there...But the points raised by Jorg and me are really very annoying. Overall I agree with both yours and Jorg's points (and I did not think it was an argument...merely sharing our observations with each other (;^)
The OWB tool is not as mature as Informatica. However, Informatica has no foothold in the database engine itself and as I mentioned earlier, is still "on the outside looking in..." The efficiency and power of set-based activity versus row-based activity is substantial.
Looking at it from another way lets take a look at Microstrategy as a way of observing a technical strategy for product development. Microstrategy focused on the internals (the engine) and developed it into the "heavy-lifting" tool in the industry. It did this primarily by leveraging the power of the backend...the database and the hosting server. For sheer brute force, it was champion of the day. It was less concerned with the pretty presentation and more concerned with getting the data out of the back-end so the user didn't have to sit there for a day and wait. Now they have begun to focus on the presentation part.
Likewise this seems to be the strategy that Oracle has used for OWB. It is designed around the database engine and leverages the power of the database to do its work. Informatica (probably because it needs to be all things to all people) has tended to view the technical offerings of the database engine as a secondary consideration in its architectural approach and has probably been forced to do so more now that Oracle has put themselves in direct competition with Informatica. To do otherwise would make their product too complex to maintain and more vendor-specific.
I am into the third data warehousing/data migration project and my previous two have been on Informatica (3 years on it).I respect your experience and your opinions...you are not a first timer. The tasks we have both had to solve and how we solved them with these tools are not necessarily the same. Could be similar in instances; could be quite different.
So the general tendency is to evaluate the tool and try to see how things that were needed to be done in my previous projects can be done with this tool. I am afraid to say .. I am still not sure how these can be implemented in OWB. The points raised by us are probably the fall out of this deficiency.One observation that I would make is that in my experience, calls to the procedural language in the database engine have tended to perform very poorly with Informatica. Informatica's scripting language is week. Therefore, if you do not have direct usability of a good, strong procedural language to tackle some complicated tasks, then you will be in a pickle when the solution is not well suited to a relational-based approach. Informatica wants you to do most things outside of the database (in the map primarily). It is how you implement the transformation logic. OWB is built entirely around the relational, procedural, and ETL components in the Oracle database engine. That is what the tool is all about.
If cost is the major factor for deciding a tool then OWB stands far ahead...Depends entirely on the client and the situation. I have implemented solutions for large companies and small companies. I don't use a table saw to cut cake and I don't use a pin knife to fall trees. Right tool for the right job.
...thats what most managers do .. without even looking how in turn by selecting such a tool they make the life tough for the developers.Been there many times. Few non-technical managers understand the process of tool evaluation and selection and the value a good process adds to the project. Nor do they understand the implications of making a bad choice (cost, productivity, maintainability).
The functionality of OWB stands way below Informatica.If you are primarily a GUI-based implementer that is true. However, I have often found that when I have been brought in to fix performance problems with Informatica implementations that the primary problem is usually with the way that the developer implemented it. Too often I have found that the developer understands how to implement logic in the GUI component (the Designer/Maps and Sessions) with a complete lack of understanding of how all this activity will impact load performance (they don't understand how the database engine works.) For example, a strong feature in Informatica is the ability to override the default SQL statement generated by Informatica. This was a smart design decision on Informatica's part. I have frequently had to go into the "code" and fix bad joins, split up complex operations, and rip out convoluted logic to get the maps to perform within a reasonable load window. Too often these developers are only viewing the problem through the "window" of the tool. They are not stepping back and look at the problem in the context of the overall architecture. In part Informatica forces them to do this. Another possible factor is they probably don't know better.
"One tool...one solution"
Microstrategy until recently had been suffering from that same condition of not allowing the developer to create the actual query). OWB engineers need to rethink their strategy on overriding the SQL.
The functionality of OWB stands way below Informatica.In some ways yes. If you do a head-to-head comparison of the GUI then yes. In other ways OWB is better (Informatica does not measure up when you compare it with all of the architectural features that the Oracle database engine offers). They need to fix the bugs and annoyances though.
.. but even the GUI of Informatica is better than OWB and gives the developer some satisfaction of working in it.Believe me I feel your pain. On the other hand, I have suffered from Informatica bugs. Ever do a port from one database eingine to another just to have it convert everything into multi-byte? Ever have it re-define your maps to parallel processing threads when you didn't ask it to?
Looking at the technical side of things I can give you one fine example ... there is no function in Oracle doing to_integer (to_number is there) but Informatica does that ... Hmm-m-m...sorry, I don't get the point.
The style of ETL approach of Informatica is far more appealing.I find it unnecessarily over-engineered.
OWB has two advantages : It is basically free of cost and it has a big brother in Oracle.
It is basically free of cost...When you are another "Microsoft", you can throw your weight around. The message for Informatica is "don't bite the hand that feeds you." Bad decisions at the top.
Regards,
Dan Phillips

Function and column

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for