Hierarchy across different dimension tables?

Hello
I have a situation here..
I have Dim1 and Dim2. They are both M to M relationship to each other. Therefore, I introduced a mapping table called Mapping_F in the middle. So the relationship looks like this:
Dim1 ---> Mapping_F------> Dim2.. Dim1 and Dim2 don't have any common keys to join directly...
Now in reality, 1 dim1 can have many dim2, 1 dim2 can also have many dim1 attribute...
We have a requirement, which is to create a hierarchy drill-down on report featuring Dim1 and other measures.. User can click on Dim1 and it will display the measures for all of the dim2 stuffs under this dim1 attribute value..
This would require creating a hierarchy that goes from Dim1 to dim2, however, based on the existing model, how can this be implemented?
Any suggestion will be greatly appreciated..
Thanks

You can try creating 2 different reports and navigate from one to another using navigate or Go URL

Similar Messages

Trying to use 2 different Dimension tables and make a hierarchy on some columns which are split into these dimensions .. how do I do that

Trying to use 2 different Dimension tables and make a hierarchy on some columns which are split into these dimensions .. how do I do that

If you need to make a hierarchy in an Attribute view you need to have all relevant fields/columns in the same Dimension table..

Can OBIEE handle hierarchy built from different dimension tables?

Can I build an hierarchy with values at various levels appearing from other dimension tables in the model ?
Thanks

Hi,
if you want to drill in Answers from an attribute of a dimension to the attribute of anothr dimension, you can use the Preferred Drill Path inside the level of an hierachy.
For example:
Dime Time
-Year
--Month
---Day
Dim Geography
-Continent
--Nation
---City
If you set in the Month level of the Dim Time the Preferred Drill Path to Nation, in Answer when you drill from Month you see Nation.
I hope it helps.
Regards,
Gianluca

Concatenate 2 columns from 2 different dimension tables

Hi,
I have 2 columns one from each dimension table.
Column A from Dimension 1 and Column B from Dimension 2.
In my answers i want the results as "dim1.Col A / Dim2.Col B".
I used the concatenate function and it dint give me the results. Both the columns are Non Numeric columns.
I use 2 fact tables in my analysis and data from both the fact tables are combined in 1 analysis.
There are non confirming dimensions between the 2 facts and hence we used hierarchies and level based measures to overcome the issue of non conforming dimensions between the 2 facts.
Any ideas on how to concatenate the 2 different dimension columns into the report ?
Thanks,
Chandra

never mind, i did it using summary columns, thanks

How to trigger a 'delete' across different related tables in ABAP?

Hello All,
I am creating database tables for storing different values of features coming under different countries. I have eight tables in my design and there are fields repeating in different tables, which i am connecting through foreign key relationship.
After entering values to all my tables, if i need to delete a particular field value which is repeating in more than two tables, is it possible to trigger a delete event by which if am deleting the field value in a particular table, all the related field values also get deleted from the respective tables?
For example, if i have a PRODUCT field in three tables, and if one of the PRODUCT is deleted from a particular table, can i trigger a delete event by which i can delete all the values related to that particular PRODUCT from all the related tables? The PRODUCT is a primary keyfield, and i have maintained proper foreign key relations also.
I have tried deleting entries using the views and using the database table itself, but only that particular table value is being deleted.
Is there any function module for triggering a delete?
Can anyone help me with some solution?Sample code will be helpful.
Thanks in Advance,
Shino

Hi,
My friend it is not advisable to delete any field from a database table bcoz it's creats incosistance data for all the other related tables, but there r few Function Modules that provide u this functionality.
Such As:
G_REPORT_DELETE_ADDFLD_ENTRY
G_CATT_DELETE_TABLE_ENTRY
RKE_DELETE_FIELDS_FROM_TABLE
Regards

"Missing most detailed table for dimension tables" eror when I run the Global Consistency check

ERRORS:
Business Model DAC Measures:
[nQSError: 15003] Missing most detailed table for dimension tables: [D_DETAILS,D_EXECUTION_PLAN,D_TASK].
[nQSError: 15001] Could not load navigation space for subject area DAC Measures.
I am also attaching my Business Model layer for easy understanding. I have a fact table and several Dimension table. I got this error only after creating the following hierarchies:
Execution Plan -> Tasks -> Details
Start Date Time Hierarchy
End Date Time Hierarchy
Is there a solution for this problem? Thanks in advance!

Yes ! My Task Hierarchy has 3 dimension tables that form a hierarchy :Execution Plan -> Tasks -> Detail
All the 3 levels in the hierarchy are 3 different dimension tables.

Dimension table sharing

Hi, Gurus,
If two(or more) cubes have some same dimensions, how are they sharing the dimension tables like SAP says? I think they can't because they have different dimension table names even they have the same infoobjects in it.
Am I right? this is a performance issue.

Hi Kunlun,
In my mind I don't know cubes can share dimension tables.
For example, even if you have two cubes with the same structure, they will have own dimension tables and fact tables.
When you first time activate a cube named CUBENAME, the system will automatically generate the following tables:
Dimension table:
/BIC/DCUBENAMEXX
Fact table:
/BIC/FCUBENAME
So for different cubes, the dimension tables' names are different.
For the performance aspect, sharing dimension will save disk space but will not benefit the query performance. You can image if system shares dimension for one big cube and one small cube, the query execution time on the small cube will be longer.
Regards,
Frank

Problem creating hierarchy based on 2 physical dimension tables

I'm having a problem creating 1 logical dimension with a drill-down hierarchy, based on two separate physical dimension tables. The errors I receive when navigating the drill-down hierarchy is:
"Cannot find logical table source coverage for logical columns" &
"Missing join between logical tables".
I'm using OBIEE 10.1.3.4
Here are the details of what I have setup sofar:
Physical layer:
Dimension table DIM_ORG with columns:
-dimension_key
-org_total_code
-org_total_description
-org_detail_code
-org_detail_description
Dimension table DIM_DEPT with columns:
-dimension_key
-dept_total_code
-dept_total_description
-dept_detail_code
-dept_detail_description
Fact table FACT_SALES with columns:
-fk_org
-fk_dept
-sum_sales
Physical Joins:
FACT_SALES.fk_org = DIM_ORG_dimension_key
FACT_SALES.fl_dept = DIM_DEPT.dimension_key
Business Model & Mapping layer:
I created a logical dimension ORG_DEPT. It contains two logical table sources (DIM_ORG & DIM_DEPT) and the following logical columns:
- All Departments (mapped to dept_total_code)
- Organisation (mapped to org_detail_description)
- Organisation Number (mapped to org_detail_code)
- Department (mapped to dept_detail_description)
- Department Code (mapped to dept_detail_code)
The business logical key is based on the combination of Organisation Number & Department Code
The hierarchy I need is: All Departments -> Organisation -> Department so I created the following hierarchy for ORG_DEPT:
- Total Level containing: All Departments
- Organisation Level containing: Organisation Number (defined as the Logical level key) & Organisation (defined als the Drill level key)
- Detail Department Level containing: Department Code (defined as Logical level key) and Department (defined as Drill level key).
In the LTS of the dimension ORG_DEPT I've set the Content levels for the sources:
DIM_ORG : Organisation Level
DIM_DEPT: Detail Department Level
In the LTS no -inner- joins have been added against related physical tables.
I created a logical fact table SALES (based on the physical fact table) and joined it against the logical dimension table ORG_DEPT.
In the LTS the Content level for ORG_DEPT is set against the Detail Department Level. No - inner- joins have been aded against related physical tables.
When I create a report in Answers to test the hierachy and select only 'All Departments' I get the correct dimension value returned. When I try to drill to the next level I get the following ODBC error:
"Cannot find logical table source coverage for logical columns: [All Departments]. Please check more detailed level keys are mapped correctly".
When I create a report in Answers and select both 'All Departments' and 'Sales' I get the correct result. When I try to drill to the next level I get a different ODBC error:
"Missing join between logical tables DIM_DEPT and DIM_DEPT: There must be at least one physical join link between the underlying physical tables".
Any suggestions are welcome!
Thanks!

Hello Robert,
Your suggestions were known to me but I still wanted to combine the two physical dimension tables in one logical dimension. So I've played around a bit more and found the solution: In my original setup I had two seperate logical table sources (one for each physical dimension table). The solution was to combine the two logical table sources in one logical table source. I achieved that by logical joining the DIM_DEPT table to the FACT_SALES table and subsequently to the DIM_ORG within the 1 LTS and using inner joins.
Then I created the logical table key (a combination of org_detail_code & dept_detail_code). After that I could create the hierarchy with no problem.
Edited by: The_Dutchman on Nov 4, 2011 9:43 PM

Conformed dimensions across several fact tables

Hi, not exactly sure how to phrase my question, so I'll just start babbling and maybe it'll come across. In our OBIEE repository (from BI applications "project analytics"), we have dimensions of CONTRACT, CONTRACT LINE, PROJECT, and TASK (CONTRACT and CONTRACT_LINE really come from a single dimension table, but are different rows and so really can be thought of as coming from two different dim tables). TASKs are really children of projects - but they were broken out into a separate dimension in the data model (no idea why....). Also, in our business, a task can be tied to one and only one contract line.
Now here's the rub - because TASK is a separate dimension from PROJECT, there is really nothing that relates them except through a fact table. This is a real pain, as it has two limitations:
1) If a "fact" for that combination of PROJECT / TASK hasn't happened yet, then no row in fact table = nothing that says they are related
2) Even if you do have a fact for everything - now our query is scanning through a fact table of (in our case) 300+ million rows, just to say which task is tied to which project
I'd like to solve this by creating a very simple "factless fact" which has columns for CONTRACT, CONTRACT LINE, PROJECT, and TASK, and simply inserts the appropriate surrogate IDs (wids) into this. Thus, instead of a 300+ million row fact table, we should be down to only 400,000 or so task / project / line / contract combos.
Now here's my question: I have a "combined" subject area that includes a project cost, project revenue, project billing, and in theory this new fact table I'm talking about. I'd want to set the new fact table to be the "implicit" fact - so that if someone just asks a questions like "show me contract lines, and which projects and tasks are assigned to it" - it would go to the new, slim, fast fact table.
But I'm concerned about what happens when someone then throws in a cost amount, revenue amt, etc. onto the query. I'm assuming that OBIEE will be smart enough to understand it should forget the implicit fact, and start using the "real" facts. Or maybe use all of them including the new fact.
I'm just trying to see if I can anticipate this causing any issues.
Thx,
Scott

You are correct, the implicit fact will only be used when there isn't any other fact measure defined in your query. Unfortunatelly you can only define an implicit fact per SA, we would love to be able to have more flexibility such as defining them per dimension etc. Another way to "force" OBIEE to select from an specific fact is to select a column from it in your Answers query. You don't to see this column in output so you can hide it. Of course this "hack" is not really very user friendly as it makes adhoc query building much more complex.

Two Fact tables with Different set of Dimension Tables

Here is my scenario:
I got two fact tables: X and Y (actually, they are the same tables, but with different level of data)
and four dimension tables: A, B, C, D
X joins relationship to all dimensions (A, B, C, D).
Y joins relationship to only A, B, C, but no D.
When I select dimension A, B and C together with fact tables X and Y in BI Answer, result is displayed and compared.
However, if I select dimension D together with fact tables X and Y, only data from fact table X is displayed. There is no result displayed for fact table Y. I know that this is because fact table Y does not join to dimension D.
If the above relationship unchanged, how can I display both X and Y's result in BI Answer when dimension D is selected?

Thanks for all your replies.
Actually, I've tried the solutions you guys mentioned. Generally speaking, the result should be displayed. However, my scenario is a little bit tricky.
table Y's figures are not the aggregation of table X for D dimension. Instead, table Y's figures include not only D dimension total, but also others (others do not mean A, B, C dimension). For example, table Y stores all food's figure, while table X stores only drink's figure. D dimension is only about drink's detail. In my scenario, other foods' figure is not provided.
So, even if I set D dimension to all/total for table X, table X's result is still not the same as table Y.
Indeed, table Y does not have a column key to join to D dimension's key. So, if I select D dimension and table Y's measures at the same time in BI Answer, result returns no data. Hence, I can't compare table X and table Y's results with selection of D dimension.
Is there any solution to solve this problem?
Edited by: TomChan on Jun 3, 2009 9:36 AM

How to maintain same width of columns across different table sections in OBIEE reprot

I have a prompt and report (analysis) on the dashboard. In the report, there are tables sections.
The problem is when I run the report, the column widths vary across different section of table. This report also showing totals too.
The report needs to be fit so there is no horizontal scroll bar in the report.
I have already given the same width in additional properties of column values, header and folder and in total's property in criteria and also in the result tab.
I am new to OBIEE, so don't know how to fix it. any help would be appreciated.
thanks in advance.

You might want to post to the OBIEE discussion area
Business Intelligence Suite Enterprise Edition

Same dimension in two different fact tables

Hi,
I have one same dimension in two different fact tables. I would like to know how BI server choose the fact table when I do a request in this dimension.
I know that is always using the same fact table, but I would like to know why choose this table and not the other.
Thanks

Sorry,
But it doesn't seem to me.
I reorded the tables in the BMM layer and it continues to use the same table, regardless this table is in last.
After, I droped that table in the BMM layer and it continued to use the same.
Thanks for your reply

Creating one dimensional hierarchy using columns from 2 different dimension

Hello guys
I have a case here.. The way our business is set up is that we have one dim table called channel dim, and another one call customers. Customer ID should be the child of channel ID. In other words, the measures at each Customer ID level should rollup to its parent channel ID level..
So I am creating a hierarchy in my BMM which is named channel sales Dim:
channel sales Dim--
-- Grand Total Level
-- Channel parent
channel ID (Key)
--Customer Details
Customer ID(Key)
Account (Sum)
Both channel_ID and Customer_ID are the primary keys of Channel Dim and Customer Dim, both dim are joined to the sales fact table..
So the hierarchy is created in such way, however when I check consistency it is giving me errors: nqserror15003: missing most detailed table for dimension table (Channel_Dim, Customer_Dim)
Any advice of how to deal with this error?
Much thanks

Hi,
Yes the fact table has the keys to the date and customer dimension. Is there any other column or information needed to create the constraint prompt?
Thanks.

OBIEE-can we link two dimension tables belonging to different fact tables?

Hi ,
I have just started with OBIEE concepts....need your views on this issue:
Fact 1 -> Dim 1, Dim2,Dim3 and so on..
Fact 2 -> Dim a, Dim b,Dimc and so on...
If I link Dim1 and Dim a with a valid key ,would that distort the star schemas to slowflake in BMM layer?
Thanks in advance!
Neha

I don't see this that would make it snowflake more like what I think as conforming dimensions. You need to make sure the grain of the measures is at what level , the they are same grain then you should be good however if they are different then you would start seeing null values.
Fact Measures use the same, conformed dimensions like Dim1 and Dim a if you trying to generate from multiple facts, the BI server was able to automatically stitch them together into a single result set. If they came from the same fact table that's easy as its only one single table, but if you are pulling from different fact tables, the conformed dimensions would allow them to be stitched into the same report
Conformance means that these sources can be mapped to a common structure – the same levels – and also the same data members.
Mark if helps.
Thanks,
SVS

Dimension table to support Hierarchy and the aggregation functions

Hello expert,
Now I seem to know why those aggregation functions e.g. SUM, COUNT failed whenever the report is executed.
I have a fact table REJECT_FACT contains all the information of rejects:
Reject ID
Reject Category
Reject Code
Reject Desc
Site Desc
Site Code
Region Desc
Age Group
Reject Date
So I created a alias REJECT_DIM based on REJECT_FACT. After several trials, I think that the aggregation functions do not work with alias because after I remove the REJECT_DIM, the aggregation seem working.
Is my concept right? Or I am missing something? I don't understand that the data model for datawarehouse should be simple, why do we need to create many dimension tables to support the hierarchy?

Hello expert,
Thank you very much for your reply.
Actually the data model is very simple. There is only one physical table REJECT_FACT. The structure is as follows:
Reject ID (NUMBER)
Reject Category (VARCHAR2)
Reject Code (VARCHAR2)
Reject Code Desc (VARCHAR2)
Site Desc (VARCHAR2)
Site Code (VARCHAR2)
Region Desc (VARCHAR2)
Age Group (VARCHAR2)
Reject Date (DATE)
The hierarchy required is as follows:
Reject Category -> Reject Code Desc -> Site Desc -> Region Desc -> Age Group -> Reject Date.
I want to produce count on each hierachy level.
How to populate the hierachy structure effectively?
Thanks......

Hierarchy across different dimension tables?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for