Issue with Calculations

Hi,
I have a report in a cross tab where
Grade --->
E S N Summation of E+S+N %age E %ageS %age N
Financial Period
2008-10 123 345 678 1146 ( Calculated using Totals) (123/1146)*100
I want to calculate %age Column which would be based on Individual value of E, S or N and summation column
Generated using Totals.
Now , In Discoverer Plus while doing calcualtions we dont have option to select totals for calculations , we can select the available items, selected items or parameters but not the Totals.
Is there a way I can Perform this calculation as % age depends on the individual Grade value and Total values of all the Grades.
Regards,
Anuj Malhotra

Hi,
You will not be able to use Discoverer totals in another calculation or in a percentage.
You will probably have to use analytic functions to create your total as a calculation. For example, use SUM(...) OVER (PARTITION BY ...) to create the total of a value in a set of records. That sum will then appear on every record and can then be used in another calculation. So you could then use it to create a percentage.
Without knowing more details of your folder and workbook I am not sure that I can help you anymore.
Rod West

Similar Messages

Having issues with calculated dimension

Hi,
I just downloaded1.15 version of desktop Lumira and was trying to create a calculated dimension from and existing (but hidden) dimesion but Lumira just keeps spinning when I hit save in the formula editor.
My formula is if {RDTE} > "04/223/2014" and {RDTE} < "05/13/2014" then "P05" else "NA".
My diemnsion is a character set (ABC) but i also tried the same by converting to Date dimension with the same outcome.
Anyone else has similar experience. I find the help document lacking in details. Any insights much appreciated...RND

Hi Rumy
Not that there should be any excuse for why saving would spin (that is an issue in itself that should be investigated), I recently had to do a similar date comparison and I used the following formula.
if DateDiffInDays({Deal End Date}, {Deal Plan End Date}) > 0
then "Delayed"
else "Closed"
I have not had a chance to compare if the results would work the same if I compared the two days as you did. Just wanted to share this in case it might be useful.

Issue with calculation of planned cost.

Hi,
Can anybody explain me the s_alr_87013127 report. I am going to implement the PP orders process in plant.
After creating and releasing the order the planned price in the report is displayed as per below
In the above screen shot SMH cost is getting update in plan cost debit and material cost maintained as per in material master is getting update in plan cost credit. Please explain me why it is happening so that further analysis can be done.
The material type is HALB and it is not going to be sale to customer. The settlement category against the order is also maintained as MAT as per below screen shot.
Hence, the order is not settled through KO08 instead of that it is direct issue from stock through MVT Type 901 and against that cost is booked to its respective cost center as per below screen shot.
Please explain me why only plan credit cost is captured instead of considering the both plan credit & debit cost.
Regards,
Samrat

Hi Owen,
Thanks for reply. My problem is that i am producing a semifinished material but not selling it and even it have no BOM & routing. Producing and capturing all its material cost and SMH cost in plan cost, then issuing it from Sloc. & settling its cost to cost center through 901 mvt. type.
Hence, when i am going to settle it then only the material cost is getting settle in the cost center. Also, please explain me that is it a standard scenario where always plan cost credit will considered material cost & SMH cost will considered as plan cost debit.
As per my study the calculation of plan cost credit & plan cost debit is as per below.
Plan Cost Credit = Actual qty. X Standard price
Plan Cost Debit = Plan qty. X SMH hour booked in routing X Activity rate
Please explain
Regards,
Samrat

Issue with calculation script - please help

There is a script that I am working on that needs to track the changes made by the user on the data form and push the entered value down proportionally to the lower levels.
It’s a signal dimensional spread. It needs to spread the parent level values entered by the users for the product dimension to below levels. The Products are in rows.
The issue is that the users can enter their data at any level for the product dimension i.e. either at Level 0 product members, Level 1 product members or at Level 2 product members. I am using two accounts A & B in sync to track the changes made.
The structure of Product dimension that shows up on the form is similar to this –
~ Products (The user can enter starting at this level and also the below levels)
~ Product A
~ Product A1 (Level 0)
~ Product A2 (Level 0)
~ Product A3 (Level 0)
~ Product B (Level 0)
~ Product C (Level 0)
~ Product D
~ Product D1 (Level 0)
~ Product D2 (Level 0)
This is what I came up with so far but it’s not working in all the cases yet. Please give your suggestions to modify this script further to make it work the right way.
FIX(P, Y, H, E, B, D, C, V, C, S, @Relative(“Products”,-1))
Account(
IF(“AccountA”->@Parent(@Currmbr(“Product”)) <> “AccountB”->@Parent(@Currmbr(“Product”)))
AccountA=AccountB->@Currmbr(“Product”)/AccountB->@Parent(@Currmbr(“Product”)))*AccountA ->@Parent(@Currmbr(“Product”));
ENDIF;
ENDFIX;
FIX(P, Y, H, E, B, D, C, V, C, S, @Relative(“Products”,0))
Account(
IF(“AccountA”->@Parent(@Currmbr(“Product”)) <> “AccountB”->@Parent(@Currmbr(“Product”)))
AccountA=AccountB->@Currmbr(“Product”)/AccountB->@Parent(@Currmbr(“Product”)))*AccountA ->@Parent(@Currmbr(“Product”));
ENDIF;
ENDFIX;
This is not working right in all cases and I am sure I am going wrong somewhere. Please let me know your ideas on how can this be achieved.
Thanks in advance.
-Krrish
Edited by: 928844 on Apr 19, 2012 11:23 AM

Well... sort of fixed it. Apparently my system doesn't like editing images with a color depth of 16bit. If I convert it down to 8 when I'm converting it from RAW, then it allows me to add layers... Is this normal?
Thank you for your time,
-Tony

Issue with calculating Top 20 % in Query Designer

Hai
I am working on Query designer 7.0 where I need to design a report which has 4 parts. The first 3 parts displays the Items with Top 20 Inventory Value with 3 respective divisions for 6 months . Now the 4th part is to display Top 20% of inventory Value.
So in this report I need to take the Total Inventory and calculate the Top20 % of the items. Hence in this report I need to refer to the top 20 value of 3 divisions. So I cant jus give one condition. So I tried the replacement path for Items with restriction to other queries and created the variables. But I cant use these varaibles in the structures of rows or columns. It gives an error that this variable cant be used in Structure.
Please do help me in refering the top 20 values of 3 divisions for 6 months and do a calculation to display the % in my 4th report.
I will assign points for any kind of help provided

If you can design all those in One query than you can have it...
It seems now your aim is just to take result for 3 queries and use it in 4th query...
But if you can figure out defining all 3 Divisions and restriction in Same Query and then put the DISPLAY OPTION = HIDE = do not display
and then use their result to display you will achieve what you want to....
for e.g.
Jan 07-----Feb 07 -
Mar 07 -
Dec 07
Division 1-- Item 1 -
Inv 1 -
Inv1.........................DO NOT DISPLAY
Item2 -
Inv2 -
Inv2..........................DO NOT DISPLAY
Item3 -
Inv3 -
Inv3..........................DO NOT DISPLAY
----
Item20 -
Inv20 -
Inv20........................DISPLAY ONLY
Division 2-- Item 1 -
Inv 1 -
Inv1......................DO NOT DISPLAY
Item2 -
Inv2 -
Inv2........................DO NOT DISPLAY
Item3 -
Inv3 -
Inv3........................DO NOT DISPLAY
----
Item20 -
Inv20 -
Inv20....................DISPLAY ONLY
Division 3-- Item 1 -
Inv 1 -
Inv1.......................DO NOT DISPLAY
Item2 -
Inv2 -
Inv2.......................DO NOT DISPLAY
Item3 -
Inv3 -
Inv3.......................DO NOT DISPLAY
----
Item20 -
Inv20 -
Inv20.........DISPLAY ONLY
THEN you will have result
Division -
Jan07 -
Feb 07 -
Marc 07
div1 -
Total inv/sum(top20) -
Total inv/sum(top20) -
Total inv/sum(top20)
div2 -
Total inv/sum(top20) -
Total inv/sum(top20) -
Total inv/sum(top20)
div3 -
Total inv/sum(top20) -
Total inv/sum(top20) -
Total inv/sum(top20)

Having issues with calculations multiplying a field by 20.

I am trying to find a correct formula that takes my field 'Quantity7' and multiplies it by 20. I have tried different forms and it always gives me an answer of 1.
Quantity7 is the sum of quantities 1-6, is that where the issue is? I am so lost!

Thanks Robert! I ended up using this formula after reading your reply and a
few others. Another tip I was missing is to make sure that the calculated
field is read only.
// Get first field value, as a number
var v1 = +getField("Quantity1").value;
// Calculate and set this field's value to the result
event.value = 20 * (v1 + 0);
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 2:29 AM, Robertlopez <[email protected]>

Issue with web part connections : won't display data when the lookup field is a calculated field

Hello,
I have a list A with a calculated field named A.A. I have a list B that has a lookup field to list A, to field A.A, named B.A. I add the two lists in a wiki page and I try to connect them - I.E., select a row from A and the rows from B would be automatically
filtered.
The B\Connections\get filtered values from A and select Provider:A.A, Consumer B.A doesn't bring any results. If I do the exact opposite: A\Connections\get filtered values from B and select Provider:B.A, Consumer A.A works fine. But, this is not what
I want.
If the A.A isn't calculated field, everything works fine. So, it looks like there's an issue with calculated fields acting as consumers.
Is this a known issue and are there any know workarounds? A workaround is to abandon calculated field and use sharepoint designer workflow.
Thank you
Christos

Hi,
According to your post, my understanding is that you had issues about connecting web parts.
I try to reproduce the issue, however, everything works well.
Create a custom list named List A, add a caculated column named A.A(Formula: =Title).
Create a custom list named List B, add a lookup column named B.A(List A: A.A).
Create a page and then insert the two list view web parts.
Edit page, select List B->Connections->Get Filtered Values From List A.
Then I can filter the List B.
I recommend to create another caculated column and get filter value form it to check whether it works.
Best Regards,
Linda Li
Linda Li
TechNet Community Support

Weird issue with XIRR

Hi everyone,
I am running into a strange issue with calculating XIRR using the following data set. If I specify guess as 0.1 , XIRR is 30%, but if I chose guess as 0.9, XIRR calculates to 163%. Which one is correct? Does XIRR calculation in Excel depend
on the guess value? Please advise. Appreciate any help in advance!
Trans Date Total
1998-07-13 (749,925)
1999-05-19 (720,523)
1999-07-16 (1,020,805)
1999-07-19 (36,346)
1999-09-20 (1,790,090)
1999-12-30 (1,333,202)
2000-01-07 (2,000,100)
2000-03-24 (1,999,801)
2000-06-19 (3,250,000)
2000-09-07 (666,700)
2000-12-19 55,026,606
2000-12-27 (6,250,000)
2001-06-12 (80,163)
2001-07-26 (233,345)
2001-08-24 (4,125,000)
2001-11-29 (3,499,960)
2001-11-30 (3,875,000)
2001-12-20 16,271
2001-12-21 411,679
2001-12-24 10,760
2001-12-26 380,543
2002-03-19 (62,738)
2002-08-02 (12,500)
2002-08-21 -
2003-02-05 (6,500,000)
2003-02-18 (510,000)
2003-02-25 (4,888,622)
2003-03-14 (250,000)
2003-03-14 (2,890,000)
2003-04-07 (2,349,014)
2003-05-21 (3,300,000)
2003-06-11 (750,000)
2003-07-17 (500,001)
2003-07-31 (200,000)
2003-12-01 (4,592,769)
2003-12-05 (2,999,999)
2004-01-21 (1,360,001)
2004-01-27 (4,700,071)
2004-04-28 (4,500,000)
2004-06-23 (3,114,582)
2004-07-28 (680,000)
2004-08-04 (2,925,000)
2004-08-10 (750,000)
2004-12-02 (2,292,680)
2004-12-08 (4,700,000)
2005-04-05 (5,042,463)
2005-04-06 2,289,826
2005-04-07 (3,644,948)
2005-05-16 (1,000,000)
2005-05-24 (3,000,000)
2005-06-01 (300,000)
2005-06-17 (2,079,006)
2005-07-12 (2,875,833)
2005-07-20 (4,000,000)
2005-10-21 (1,499,999)
2005-10-21 (125,000)
2005-11-16 70,184,967
2005-12-13 (516,370)
2005-12-20 (4,300,000)
2006-03-08 (5,294,431)
2006-03-28 (1,500,000)
2006-03-31 (3,468,517)
2006-05-11 (3,229,449)
2006-06-15 (1,401,839)
2006-06-30 197,235
2006-08-17 (1,600,001)
2006-10-13 (1,666,500)
2006-10-18 (1,486,650)
2006-10-27 6,821,039
2006-10-31 (3,215,117)
2006-11-20 (1,000,000)
2006-11-22 (125,000)
2006-12-05 (100,000)
2006-12-21 (245,001)
2006-12-22 (2,374,469)
2007-01-08 (150,000)
2007-01-30 (2,500,001)
2007-02-01 (628,562)
2007-02-21 (1,603,832)
2007-04-02 (50,000)
2007-05-10 (1,750,000)
2007-05-21 (801,916)
2007-05-22 (3,440,875)
2007-05-23 (1,429,660)
2007-06-14 (2,250,076)
2007-06-21 (41,663)
2007-07-19 (250,000)
2007-07-27 (4,184,000)
2007-08-03 (4,998,805)
2007-08-03 (6,875,002)
2007-09-18 (4,350,000)
2007-10-03 (1,281,318)
2007-10-09 (3,250,000)
2007-10-23 26,857,707
2007-11-30 (125,000)
2007-12-14 (3,375,000)
2007-12-14 (1,250,001)
2007-12-21 (6,000,000)
2007-12-21 (1,333,201)
2007-12-28 (151,133)
2008-01-10 (3,750,000)
2008-02-27 (1,205,930)
2008-03-07 (1,000,000)
2008-03-17 (4,000,000)
2008-03-25 (250,000)
2008-03-27 (1,000,000)
2008-04-11 (875,000)
2008-04-16 (3,700,430)
2008-04-18 (4,521,916)
2008-04-25 (4,025,000)
2008-05-07 (4,879,441)
2008-05-15 (300,000)
2008-05-16 (250,000)
2008-07-03 (200,000)
2008-10-15 (250,000)
2008-10-22 (3,250,000)
2008-10-29 (1,000,000)
2008-11-04 (4,250,000)
2008-11-13 (2,449,999)
2008-11-17 (583,275)
2008-11-17 (50,000)
2008-12-03 (1,250,000)
2008-12-05 (100,000)
2008-12-18 (500,000)
2008-12-18 (1,249,999)
2008-12-23 (750,000)
2008-12-24 (2,000,208)
2009-01-02 (7,451,653)
2009-02-03 (4,906,465)
2009-02-04 (525,000)
2009-02-04 (1,000,000)
2009-02-12 (300,000)
2009-02-19 (2,500,001)
2009-02-26 (300,200)
2009-03-06 (1,639,421)
2009-03-27 (2,000,001)
2009-03-31 (3,000,000)
2009-03-31 (2,076,393)
2009-04-03 (2,675,001)
2009-04-13 (4,527,230)
2009-04-14 (503,365)
2009-04-21 (2,500,000)
2009-04-24 (1,514,028)
2009-04-27 2,794,294
2009-04-28 (2,499,999)
2009-05-19 (1,208,144)
2009-06-05 (175,000)
2009-06-29 (4,000,000)
2009-07-01 (787,920)
2009-07-06 (5,000,000)
2009-07-09 (3,000,000)
2009-08-14 (300,000)
2009-08-24 -
2009-09-09 (3,000,000)
2009-09-29 (12,000,000)
2009-10-14 (8,000,000)
2009-10-16 (4,500,000)
2009-11-13 (3,129,492)
2009-11-24 (1,416,525)
2009-12-02 (3,566,944)
2009-12-04 (6,750,000)
2009-12-16 (100)
2009-12-17 (3,000,000)
2010-01-04 (5,521,473)
2010-01-12 (800,000)
2010-01-22 (2,500,000)
2010-01-26 (4,500,000)
2010-03-01 (4,000,000)
2010-03-18 (400,000)
2010-03-26 (2,929,374)
2010-04-19 (2,469,690)
2010-04-26 (1,500,000)
2010-05-12 (2,800,003)
2010-05-14 (307,325)
2010-05-18 (1,000,000)
2010-05-26 (3,000,000)
2010-06-21 (1,707,915)
2010-07-08 -
2010-07-09 (314,287)
2010-07-13 (4,000,000)
2010-07-14 (35,294)
2010-07-22 (3,000,000)
2010-08-02 (314,287)
2010-08-03 (3,857,408)
2010-08-11 (3,000,000)
2010-08-11 (1,741,509)
2010-08-20 (1,500,000)
2010-08-31 (130,434)
2010-09-01 (157,143)
2010-09-03 (6,214,999)
2010-09-10 (250,000)
2010-09-29 (307,354)
2010-10-08 (3,999,999)
2010-10-13 (5,000,000)
2010-10-14 (10,000,001)
2010-10-18 (5,000,000)
2010-10-22 (375,000)
2010-10-26 (4,466,631)
2010-10-28 (582,016)
2010-11-09 (3,000,000)
2010-11-09 (200,005)
2010-11-09 (500,000)
2010-11-12 (1,500,000)
2010-11-16 (8,528,615)
2010-11-30 (2,055,868)
2010-12-07 (1,000,000)
2010-12-14 (1,375,000)
2010-12-15 (499,950)
2010-12-17 (2,189,966)
2011-01-03 (2,912,089)
2011-01-25 (300,000)
2011-02-02 (4,288,636)
2011-02-14 (300,000)
2011-02-18 (3,769,846)
2011-03-02 (1,376,991)
2011-03-08 (3,541,181)
2011-03-11 (231,301)
2011-03-22 (1,500,000)
2011-03-25 (245,232)
2011-03-29 (153,965)
2011-03-29 (200,000)
2011-04-22 (8,000,000)
2011-04-27 (4,500,000)
2011-05-04 514,384
2011-05-04 (318,350)
2011-05-18 (6,240,282)
2011-05-25 (1,350,000)
2011-05-27 (276,824)
2011-06-14 984,920
2011-06-17 (4,000,000)
2011-06-24 (307,960)
2011-06-30 (5,300,003)
2011-06-30 (3,800,000)
2011-07-05 (800,000)
2011-07-12 (3,746,252)
2011-07-13 (3,999,996)
2011-07-25 (5,333,332)
2011-08-24 (4,871,000)
2011-08-24 (83,121)
2011-08-31 (1,375,557)
2011-09-07 (3,989,268)
2011-09-07 (10,732)
2011-09-08 (1,199,999)
2011-10-03 (2,791,505)
2011-10-11 (7,999,997)
2011-10-14 (500,000)
2011-10-14 (150,000)
2011-10-28 (499,800)
2011-11-15 (552,022)
2011-11-16 (103,900)
2011-11-18 (5,000,001)
2011-11-22 (4,303,216)
2011-11-28 (266,750)
2011-12-20 2,257
2012-03-08 (4,426,890)
2012-03-19 (166,650)
2012-04-02 (99,632)
2012-04-04 75,000
2012-04-09 (1,760,001)
2012-04-18 (214,525)
2012-04-30 (499,950)
2012-04-30 (4,750,000)
2012-05-15 (3,000,000)
2012-06-01 (687,779)
2012-06-08 (300,336)
2012-06-22 (3,220,003)
2012-07-02 (1,500,000)
2012-07-09 (1,166,550)
2012-07-19 292,953
2012-08-08 (200,000)
2012-08-10 (5,000,000)
2012-08-17 1,554,941
2012-08-27 (187,923)
2012-08-27 74,435
2012-08-28 (984,361)
2012-08-29 (50,000)
2012-08-30 2,535,254
2012-09-05 32,054
2012-09-10 (853,778)
2012-09-18 42,675,696
2012-09-19 (1,202,806)
2012-09-27 (36,666)
2012-10-01 (37,500,000)
2012-10-03 (597,000)
2012-10-09 (2,258,356)
2012-10-15 (2,024,324)
2012-10-17 247,000
2012-10-24 (649,999)
2012-11-07 (1,000,000)
2012-11-13 (3,000,000)
2012-11-16 (3,659,746)
2012-11-29 (125,000)
2012-11-30 (4,372,500)
2012-11-30 (2,455,765)
2012-11-30 (500,000)
2012-12-12 (2,826,269)
2012-12-31 2,368,255
2013-01-08 104,455
2013-01-31 46,219,998
2013-02-19 (3,500,176)
2013-02-22 2,643,638
2013-02-28 (1,500,000)
2013-03-01 (500,000)
2013-03-15 (4,000,002)
2013-03-19 (5,070,620)
2013-03-29 (5,134,220)
2013-04-02 (3,750,003)
2013-04-03 (1,380,764)
2013-04-09 125,000
2013-04-16 (499,950)
2013-04-23 1,042,324
2013-05-15 (6,000,000)
2013-05-16 43,453,714
2013-05-17 (1,499,999)
2013-06-07 (975,367)
2013-06-19 (3,992,344)
2013-06-19 (166,650)
2013-06-19 (333,350)
2013-06-28 (4,000,000)
2013-07-10 23,682,545
2013-07-16 65,083,073
2013-07-18 (3,500,000)
2013-08-15 5,960
2013-08-20 (499,950)
2013-08-20 1,596
2013-08-21 (1,603,741)
2013-08-21 (3,217,228)
2013-08-27 66,013,062
2013-09-17 6,675
2013-09-18 (1,518,500)
2013-09-30 (5,500,000)
2013-10-02 (2,500,000)
2013-10-07 (180,646)
2013-10-22 (1,999,998)
10/31/2013 35,400,000
10/31/2013 32,768,003
10/31/2013 79,349,314
10/31/2013 103,638,565
10/31/2013 11,380,481
10/31/2013 7,841,206
10/31/2013 4,622,969
10/31/2013 18,612,227
10/31/2013 34,616,699
10/31/2013 59,009,720
10/31/2013 36,632,485
10/31/2013 12,000,002
10/31/2013 16,121,000
10/31/2013 28,262,585
10/31/2013 10,218,164
10/31/2013 2,500,000
10/31/2013 13,651,948
10/31/2013 166,650
10/31/2013 333,350
10/31/2013 24,873,140
10/31/2013 5,000,000
10/31/2013 7,441,433
10/31/2013 24,252,491
10/31/2013 56,735,856
10/31/2013 48,001,960
10/31/2013 14,849,998
10/31/2013 4,000,000
10/31/2013 10,428,896
10/31/2013 649,999
10/31/2013 8,104,528
10/31/2013 63,563,762
10/31/2013 500,000
10/31/2013 17,589,418
10/31/2013 37,500,000
10/31/2013 402,062
10/31/2013 -
10/31/2013 -
10/31/2013 -
10/31/2013 127,999
Shahfaisal Muhammed http://shahfaisalmuhammed.blogspot.com

According to Microsoft ’s official documentation, the Guess parameter is just regarded as a starting point for XIRR function to calculate the internal rate, it doesn’t affect the result.
But based on my test by using the data you given, I get the same result.So it might be an issue of XIRR function itself.
More information for your reference:
http://freefincal.com/irr-xirr-excel-limitations-calculate-returns/
http://www.financialwebring.org/gummy-stuff/XIRR-bug.htm

Issue with magsafe/charging (blinks green, amber, off)

Having a quirky issue with my mid-2009 Macbook Pro.
A month or so ago, I began having an issue with my macbook charging. When the computer is up and running and I plug in the magsafe it will say "Calculating..." and then say "Not Charging" and then switch to battery use. It constantly does this as long as the magsafe is connected. The lights on the magsafe will constantly cycle from green to amber to no light.
At first, it would do it a few times then it would start charging. Now it constantly does this without ever stopping. I was editing video the other day for a while and it never stopped the cycle.
Thinking it was the battery, I took it into the Apple Store last week and got a new battery because it had been saying "Service battery" for a while and the battery would only last about 20 minutes on a charge. So I just thought the battery finally refused to charge.
But the problem still exists.
The magsafe is new (only 3 months old) and here's the quirky thing: the computer will charge if it's asleep (lid closed) or shut down completely. No blinking lights at all. It will charge as long as it's asleep or shut down. So I don't think it's the charger. But as soon as you hit the power button to starting booting up, it will blink.
I have reset the SMC a couple times actually, but no change.
Is there something software/firmware related that I haven't tried? Any insight or suggestions would be greatly appreciated before I take it back to the Apple Store (which is about an hour away).
Thanks!

Try resetting the system management controller
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3964?viewlocale=en_US
If that did nothing for you, try resetting the NVRAM
https://support.apple.com/kb/HT1379

BW 3.5 - Issue with formula variable with replacement path

Dear experts,
I'm facing an issue with formula variable with replacement path.
Just to clarify, I know replacement paths is raising a lot of questions but I've been using this functionnality extensively in the past, both in 7.0 and 3.5, so I'm not looking for basic information about how to use it.
I'm trying to setup a simple report that would show total values per plant of Purchase Order < 100
To do so I've setup a calculated key figure as follow:
VAR1 * ("PO value" < 100 ) * "PO value"
VAR1 is a formula variable with replacement path on 'purchase order' and value attribute 'constant =1'.
(The report has to show values summarized by plant but should not show the detail PO by PO, so I'm not looking at a solution based on condition)
The report as characteristic "plant" in rows and my CKF in columns.
Now let's take an example. I have 3 POs in Plant 1:
PO1 -> 150
PO2 -> 90
PO3 -> 80
Because of the variable with replacement path, the result in my query should be:
plant1 = 170 (even though characteristic "purchase order" is not in my rows, system should evaluate PO one by one and return values only for those two that are below 100).
But the result coming is 320, which is wrong.
I've done the same report on many other 3.5 systems and it worked perfectly, and I am not able to get proper support from SAP OSS who keep saying that this functionnality is not ready in 3.5 (although I've provided screenshot of this working on another 3.5 system!!! how frustrating...)
They have also pointed to problems of Before and After aggregation but that has absolutely no impact. Once again, the scenario is working perfectly on other 3.5 systems with the same query design, so i'm sure it has nothing to do with Query Designer options.
Would anyone have ever come to an equivalenet problem? I'm wondering whether the DB itself could not play a role in the variable with ref characteristic 'constant =1' ...
Any though is welcome!
thanks

Hi,
The text variable is replaced when the exact date is clear for this key figure column according to the restriction.
To achive this, please make sure that either the variable is directly restricted in the key figure selection, or that the date characteristic is in drilldown.
Regards,
Patricia

Is there a recommended limit on the number of custom sections and the cells per table so that there are no performance issues with the UI?

Is there a recommended limit on the number of custom sections and the cells per table so that there are no performance issues with the UI?

Thanks Kelly,
The answers would be the following:
1200 cells per custom section (NEW COUNT), and up to 30 custom sections per spec.
Assuming all will be populated, and this would apply to all final material specs in the system which could be ~25% of all material specs.
The cells will be numeric, free text, drop downs, and some calculated numeric.
Are we reaching the limits for UI performance?
Thanks

Issue with Asset Retirement without Revenue (ABAVN)

Hi Experts, hope that you are able to help shed some light on an issue with retirement without revenue (Scrapping).
We have an asset capitalised in FY 2007 with two depreciation areas 01 - Book & 15 Tax. There have then been settlements made to the asset from WSB Elements using transaction type 331 & 336. These were through FY 2008 and depreciation was calculated correctly throughout this time.
The issue was then in FY 2009 when there have been negative settlements posted (adjustments) to the asset and then the asset was retired. The retirement was posted but the values aren't what was expected. It was my belief that the posting should be credit APC, debit accumulated depreciation and then posting to a loss account defined in AO86.
Period Control are the same for retirement '01' for both the straight-line method in book depreciation and the declining balance method in the tax depreciation area .
The posting has been pretty much as expected in the book depreciation area - but in the tax depreciation area where the depreciation key is declining balance there is a reported gain from the retirement.
The report for depreciation are 01 - book shows retirement $1m split between $1.1m in PY and -$0.1m in Current Year.
The issue is that in the tax depreciation area the amount posted for retirement is $1.0 but depreciation posted is $1.125 and -$0.5 with a respective Gain for both prior year (PY) and current year... why has this happened ???
Thanks in advance
Chris
Retirement posting:
PK 75 CR APC value                 TType 200
PK 70 DR Acc. Dep'n CY          TType 250
PK 70 DR Amortisation              TType 290

Thanks Tarun,
I've solved checking the limitation in Customizing. There was a limitation for the Retirement: this was activated only for first Depreciation Area, so for the other ones no retirement will be calculated and net book value was always not equal to zero.
Regards,
Jody

Performance issues with Planning data load & Agg in 11.1.2.3.500

We recently upgraded from 11.1.1.3 to 11.1.2.3. Post upgrade we face performance issues with one of our Planning job (eg: Job E). It takes 3x the time to complete in our new environment (11.1.2.3) when compared to the old one (11.1.1.3). This job loads then actual data and does the aggregation. The pattern which we noticed is , if we run a restructure on the application and execute this job immediately it gets completed as the same time as 11.1.1.3. However, in current production (11.1.1.3) the job runs in the following sequence Job A->Job B-> Job C->Job D->Job E and it completes on time, but if we do the same test in 11.1.2.3 in the above sequence it take 3x the time . We dont have a window to restructure the application to before running Job E every time in Prod. Specs of the new Env is much higher than the old one.
We have Essbase clustering (MS active/passive) in the new environment and the files are stored in the SAN drive. Could this be because of this? has any one faced performance issues in the clustered environment?

Do you have exactly same Essbase config settings and calculations performing AGG ? . Remember something very small like UPDATECALC ON/OFF can make a BIG difference in timing..

Issue with down payment tax cal and clearing it aganest vendor inv

HI,
I have an issue with down payment tax cal.
1.     I had configured withholding tax and raised down payment, tax has been cal
2.     In the next step I had raised inv, at this time also tax had been cal
3.     When I am doing down payment clearing the tax collected at the time of down payment had to be reversed but itu2019s not.
Can any one give me solution for clearing the tax that cal on down payment.
Thanking you.

Dear
Vendor master has got tax codes both at the time of payment and at the time of invoice. Hence system is calculating tds on both occassions.
Since you pay advance first tds calculated is right. Now while doing miro remove the tax codes manually and do miro/mir7/fb60.
If already MIRO/MIR7/FB60 done then reverse the invoice document and clear the tax GL accounts.
Regards

Issue with 0HRPOSITION_ATTR extractor

We are live with BW HR application and having issue with 0HRPOSITION master data. We are extracting data from SAP using 0HRPOSITION_ATTR datasource. I noticed that data is not maintained correctly in master data tables in BW and giving us incorrect results in reporting. Consider below mentioned scenario:
Position A created as vacant on 04/01/2006 with start date (BEGDA/ Valid from) as 04/01/2006 and End date (ENDDA/ Valid to) as 12/31/9999 and is vacant. Below mentioned entry is shown under maintain master data for 0HRPOSITION in BW:
Position Valid To   Valid From Position Vacant
A        03/31/2006 01/01/1000
A        12/31/9999 04/01/2006        X
Position A is now delimited on 09/15/2006 as its no more required. In SAP, position has record only from 04/01/2006 till 09/15/2006 as vacant. When record is extracted in BW, it creates below mentioned entry in master data table.
Position Valid To    Valid From Position Vacant
A         03/31/2006 01/01/1000
A         09/15/2006 04/01/2006        X
A         12/31/9999 09/16/2006        X
Entry 09/16- 12/31 is incorrect as position doesnt exist for this duration. If we report on 0HRPOSTION with key date as 09/30/2006, it shows position A as vacant though position no longer exists.
Has anyone come across this situation. any help is greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Milind

Hi
I have nt worked with this data source.
1)Is your data source delta enabled?
2)Try running RSA3 and check for record which is not coming fine. If in RSA3 record is fine then check calculations(if any ) in update/transfer rule.
Let me know if it helps..
Sorabh
Assign point if it helps**
Message was edited by: Sorabh Arora

Issue with Calculations

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for