OBIEE Conformed dimension with Bridge Table

Hi,
I have an issue and tried all the links from Mark and Gerad regarding bridge tables. But probably this is a bit different.
I have to extend the OOB data model for OBIA - where the relationship between group account and gl account dimensions are 1 to many. In my case its many to many and hence bridge table.As this is not a standard customization, so posting this thread here.
Although its out of the box, a short description of the scenario.
Account Dimension levels -
total --->Group account---->Gl account
The logical table has two LTS - GL account and Group account forming a conformed dimension using column mapping.
Earlier(OOB) there was no join the physical layer between these tables ,as I had to use the Bridge table , so I joined these two with the bridge table in physical layer.
But the problem is, if I try to use standard technique to include the bridge table into the LTS of the group account table (i.e. Group account---->bridge<-------Gl account),
there is a problem of over counting ,as the group account level is also connected to summary fact tables - the query will include the bridge table and hence over count.
So my requirement is this -
When only Group account is selected it will hit the summary fact tables (content level is already set in OOB), but it shouldn't use the bridge table - so no overcount.
If we drill from Group account level or when Both Group account and Gl account is selected, it would use the bridge table and hit the detail fact table (content level is already set in OOB).
I am using OBIA 7963 with OBIEE11g.
This is the model - Summary facts <-------Group account ------>Bridge<-------Gl account-------->Detail Facts
Please help.
Regards,
Krish
Edited by: Krish on Aug 7, 2011 9:48 AM
Edited by: Krish on Aug 7, 2011 9:50 AM

Anybody please any i/p?

Similar Messages

Weight factors in a many-to-many relationship with bridge table

Hi, I have the same N:N relationship schema of this link:
http://www.rittmanmead.com/2008/08/28/the-mystery-of-obiee-bridge-tables/
In my bridge table I have a weight factor for every couple (admission,diagnosis). If I aggregate and query in Answers these columns:
DIAGNOSIS | ADMISSIONS_COSTS
every single diagnosis has the sum of the WHOLE Admission_cost it refers to, not its contribute to it (for example 0.30 as weight factor). The result is an ADMISSION_COSTS sum larger than the ADMISSION_COSTS sum in the lowest detail level, because it sums many times the same cost.
How could I use my weight factor and calculate the right diagnosis contribute to its admission? In BI Admin I tried to build a calculated LogicalColumn based on Physical column, but in the expression builder I can select only the ADMISSION_COST measure physical column, and it doesn't let me pick the weight factor from the bridge table.
Thanks in advance!

I'm developing a CS degree project with 2 professors, Matteo Golfarelli and Stefano Rizzi, who have developed the Dimensional Fact Model for data warehouses and wrote many books about it.
They followed the Kimball theory about N:N and used its bridge table concept, so when I said them that in OBIEE there is this definition they were very happy.
But they stopped this happiness when I said that bridge tables only connect fact tables to dimension tables, and to create N:N between levels at higher aggregation we should use logical joins as you said in your blog. I need to extract metadata concepts from UDML exportation language, and about N:N I can do it only with bridge table analysis, I can't extract and identify a N:N level relationship from a multiple join schema as in your blog... this is the limit of your solution for our project, only this!
PS: sorry for my english, I'm italian!
thanks for the replies!

Modelling Time Dimension with Fact Table containing Start Date and End Date

Hi Gurus,
I have a time dimension with Year till Date. I have a fact table which consists of Start Date, End Date, Person ID, Department ID.
How do i design Time dimension with fact table the below scenario
In the dashboard i have start Month and End month as prompts.
In the report i need to display Count(Person ID) > Start Date and < End Date along the trend.
For instance, i have selected Jan-2009 as start date and Apr-2009 as End Date, then i need to display Count(Person ID) of Jan-2009, Feb2009, Mar-2009 andApr-2009.
I Can not connect Time dimension with only Start Date or only with End Date to get the trend along the months.
Please advice on the issue which i am having.

Hi,
Thanks for the response, Infact i tried using Complex join in physical layer. I have considered Time table joined with Fact table, and used >= and took and alias of the Time table and joined fact table using <=. When coming to BMM, i am not knowing how do i design this as if i merge the both the time dimensiona and its alias into single table, values will not be correct and if i make them as seperate columns. i can not show the trend as both are different columns.
Can you please let know where i am going wrong.
Thanks

Avoid duplicates when i join with bridge table

i have a requirement with many to many relations between fact and dimention,that is the reason we have created bridge tables in the database.
if i execute only query on the fact table it is giving correct results.when ever i join with bridge tables it is returning lot of duplicate records.
Ex:
select amount from fact where column = 'xyz'
100
then it is returing one record.(this value is correct)
when ever i join this fact table with bridge table then it is returning duplicate records.
select a.amount from fact inner join bridge table b on a.fk=b.fk
100
100
100
100
100
how many number of fk's associated that many 100's are generating
in this case it is returning duplicate records.
in the RPD i have joined like one to many between fact to dimention.
if anybody face this type of situation please let me know how to resolve this?(FYI...i would have to do this before BM..because lot of other thing are coming into picture on BMM that's why i should have to achieve this in either physical or in database.
Thanks in advance
Edited by: user12077461 on Apr 3, 2011 6:39 PM
Edited by: user12077461 on Apr 17, 2011 4:51 PM

I understand what you say but partially.. please explain in more detail how to do that;
How should look the adrese_nezonate block, then? I have to add a 'name' column and set copy value from item property to 'STREETS.NAME', and database_property No?
Then the post-query trigger how should look like (the order by clause)? The post-query sends the entire query (with where/order by clauses) to the server, but in that "select... where... order by" (built dynamically) there are only columns from that block (adrese_nezonate). I need to join with streets, INSIDE that query.
Thanks.

Implement conforming dimensions with business objects

Hey guys,
I have 2 fact tables joined to 3 conforming dimensions, how can I build the universe to aggregate the fields in facts in one query?
Someone told me to create merged dimensions at report level, but our clients don't want us to do like that.
Appreciate if you guys could provide solutions.
Thanks!
Edited by: GodBlessMe on Jan 28, 2010 11:26 PM

Hi,
one of the most important criteria would be the source system... If the data will come from R/3 or ECC going with SAP BI will definitvely make sense; otherwise they're plenty of comparison in the internet...
Running R/3 as ERP and choosing another BI solution could quickly become a nightmare in terms of data extraction...
hope this helps...
Olivier.

OBI EE 10g: Bridge tables and Based on Dimensions Aggregation

hi experts,
i am working on OBI EE 10 g (10.1.3.4)
The BM&M layer consist of:
1) Logical fact table "Sale_Indicators"
Fields: SALE_ID (PK, FK),
D1_ID (FK),
D2_ID (FK),
Indicator1 (measure, level of granularity: SALE_ID),
Indicator2 (measure, level of granularity: SALE_ID),
Indicator3 (measure, level of granularity: SALE_ID)
2) Logical dimension table
"Sales" (PK: SALE_ID),
"D1" (PK: D1_ID),
"D2" (PK: D2_ID),
"Customers" (PK: SALE_ID, CUST_ID) - bridge table!
"Products" (PK: SALE_ID, PROD_ID) - bridge table!
3) Dimensions: SalesDim, D1Dim, D2Dim, CustomersDim, ProductsDim
If fact table is joined with bridge table, the number of rows in fact table is multiplied, for example:
D1_ID | SALE_ID | CUST_ID | Indicator1
777 | 1 | 14 | 10
777 | 1 | 17 | 10
777 | 2 | 15 | 12
888 | 3 | 16 | 20
888 | 3 | 17 | 20
888 | 4 | 19 | 30
I need to get report:
D1_ID | Indicator1 (SUM)
777 | 22
888 | 50
and with filter by customer, for example (CUST_ID = 17):
D1_ID | Indicator1 (SUM)
777 | 10
888 | 20
i am trying to use "based on dimension" aggregation, for example (Indicator1):
Dimension Formula
CustomersDim MIN
ProductsDim MIN
Others SUM
The generated physical SQL performs joining EVERY dimension to the fact table, even though they are not included in the final result set.
Is there any way to tweak logical or physical model in order to eliminate excessive joins?
Thanks in advance!
Edited by: 859688 on 31.10.2011 4:04
Edited by: 859688 on 31.10.2011 4:06
Edited by: 859688 on 31.10.2011 4:08

I found this text on the help, but I didn't understand, because when I check the "based on dimensions" check box, I can choose aggregation rules for each dimension, not only the time dimension.
Also, I found in the help menu:
"In the Aggregation tab, select the Based on dimensions check box.
The Browse dialog box automatically opens.
In the Browse dialog box, click New, select a dimension over which you want to aggregate, and then click OK.
In the Aggregation tab, from the Formula drop-down list, select a rule."
I did the same steps suggested by the text above, but it didn't work.

Many to Many relationship - Bridge Table

This post may be more appropriate for a data modeling discussion group, but thought I would post here because it will ultimately be modeled/used in OBIEE.
Can someone help me understand what the point/use is for a Bridge table when managing a many to many relationship between a fact table and a dimension? I have read a hundred different ways to handle this situation with the brige table method being the overwhelming approved approach .. but I don't see what a bridge table specifically buys you (Im sure Im missing something though).
For example .. If I have:
EVENT_FACT
EFkey
CRDimKey
Famount
CUSTOMER_ROLE_DIM
CRDimKey
Customer Name
Role
So a customer can hold multiple roles and therefore 1 event fact record could link to multiple CUSTOMER ROLE records and 1 customer role record will most likely link to multiple EVENT_FACT records.
As I understand the bridge approach would put a bridge table CUSTOMER_ROLE_EVENT_BRIDGE in place like follows:
CUSTOMER_ROLE_EVENT_BRIDGE
EFkey
CRDimkey
WeightFactor
With this approach you now have the following setup:
EVENT_FACT one-to-many CUSTOMER_ROLE_EVENT_BRIDGE
CUSTOMER_ROLE_DIM many-to-many CUSTOMER_ROLE_EVENT_BRIDGE
Doesn't a many to many relationship still exist from the dimension to the bridge table? Since all we did was join the dimension to the fact table to create the bridge table I dont see how the many to many from dimension to bridge doesnt exist?
It seems somewhat inneficient to join the dimension to the bridge ahead of time to create this table and place the weight factor on it. Why not just compute the weight factor of the dimension and place that as a field on the dimension itself and use it when joined to the fact table?
Thanks for the help and insight!!
k
Edited by: user_K on May 19, 2010 4:34 PM

I'm developing a CS degree project with 2 professors, Matteo Golfarelli and Stefano Rizzi, who have developed the Dimensional Fact Model for data warehouses and wrote many books about it.
They followed the Kimball theory about N:N and used its bridge table concept, so when I said them that in OBIEE there is this definition they were very happy.
But they stopped this happiness when I said that bridge tables only connect fact tables to dimension tables, and to create N:N between levels at higher aggregation we should use logical joins as you said in your blog. I need to extract metadata concepts from UDML exportation language, and about N:N I can do it only with bridge table analysis, I can't extract and identify a N:N level relationship from a multiple join schema as in your blog... this is the limit of your solution for our project, only this!
PS: sorry for my english, I'm italian!
thanks for the replies!

Modelling 2 Fact Tables with Non-Conforming Dimension in OBIEE 11g

Hi all,
I have two fact tables (Fact 1 and Fact 2) and two dimension tables (Product and Rule). The Product dimension table is a conforming dimension and is used in both fact tables, but the Rule dimension is a non-conforming dimension which is used only one fact table. I'm using OBIEE 11g (11.1.1.6.0).
====
Fact 1
====
Sales ID | Product ID | Quantity | Sales Description | Sales Status
S001 | P001 | 100 | bla bla bla bla bla | N
S001 | P002 | 200 | bla bla bla bla bla | N
S002 | P001 | 200 | lab lab lab lab lab | Y
S002 | P003 | 250 | lab lab lab lab lab | Y
Notes for Fact 1:
- One Sales ID can have multiple Product IDs
- Sales Description and Sales Status are the same for one Sales ID (repeating Sales Description and Sales Status for the same Sales ID)
====
Fact 2
====
Sales ID | Product ID | Rule ID | Score
S001 | P001 | R001 | 2
S001 | P001 | R002 | 3
S001 | P002 | R003 | 1
S002 | P001 | R003 | 1
S002 | P003 | R002 | 2
S002 | P003 | R004 | 5
Notes for Fact 2:
- One combination of Sales ID and Product ID can have multiple Rule ID
I'm wondering how best to model these tables so that I can create this report (number of the dimension and fact tables created in the business model, level mapping, aggregation rule, etc)? Any suggestion/advice on how to achieve this?
Sales ID | Product ID | Quantity | Sales Description | Sales Status | Rule ID | Score
S001 | P001 | 100 | bla bla bla bla bla | N | R001 | 2
S001 | P001 | 100 | bla bla bla bla bla | N | R002 | 3
S001 | P002 | 200 | bla bla bla bla bla | N | R003 | 1
S002 | P001 | 200 | lab lab lab lab lab | Y | R003 | 1
S002 | P003 | 250 | lab lab lab lab lab | Y | R002 | 2
S002 | P003 | 250 | lab lab lab lab lab | Y | R004 | 5
Thank you very much!

Hi Dhar, thanks for the suggestions.
I tested what you suggested, but the result is not as per my expectation mentioned above. Here's what I did:
1. In physical layer:
- I joined Fact 1 table with Product dimension table only
- I joined Fact 2 table with Product and Rule dimension tables
2. In business model layer:
- I created 3 logical tables: Fact, Product, and Rule
- The Product table contains the Product ID and Product Name from the Product dimension table in the physical layer
- I created the hierarchy (logical dimension) for Product with only ProductTotal level (as the grand total level) and ProductDetail level that contains Product ID and Product Name
- The Rule table contains the Rule ID and Rule Name from the Rule dimension table in the physical layer
- I created the hierarchy (logical dimension) for Rule with only RuleTotal level (as the grand total level) and RuleDetail level that contains Rule ID and Rule Name
- The Fact table contains 2 logical tables sources: Fact 1 (which logical level in the Content tab is mapped to ProductDetail and RuleTotal) and Fact 2 (which logical level in the Content tab is mapped to ProductDetail and RuleDetail)
- The Fact table contains Sales ID logical column (mapped to both Fact 1 and Fact 2 logical table sources)
- The Fact table also contains Sales Description and Sales Status logical columns (mapped to only Fact 1), which aggregation rule is the default to None
- The Fact table also contains Quantity logical column (mapped to only Fact 1), which aggregation rule is set to Sum
- The Fact table also contains Score logical column (mapped to only Fact 2), which aggregation rule is set to Sum
OBIEE returns the expected result when I retrieve the report:
Sales ID | Product ID | Quantity | Sales Description | Sales Status
However, OBIEE returns an error when I retrieve the reports:
Sales ID | Product ID | Quantity | Sales Description | Sales Status | Rule ID
or
Sales ID | Product ID | Quantity | Sales Description | Sales Status | Rule ID | Score
The error is:
Error Codes: OPR4ONWY:U9IM8TAC:OI2DL65P
State: HY000. Code: 10058. [NQODBC] [SQL_STATE: HY000] [nQSError: 10058] A general error has occurred. [nQSError: 43113] Message returned from OBIS. [nQSError: 43119] Query Failed: [nQSError: 14020] None of the fact tables are compatible with the query request FACT.SALES_STATUS. (HY000)
And the Score column is blank when I retrieved this report:
Sales ID | Product ID | Quantity | Sales Description | Sales Status | Score
Any suggestion anyone? Please help. Thanks a lot!
Edited by: stewartlife on Nov 29, 2012 4:01 PM

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

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

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

OBIEE 11g: Non conformed dimension filter

Hi,
I have two fact tables and some confromed and non conformed dimensions between the fact tabels.
The hiearchies being built and proper levels were set for the fact tables. The measures of the fact were set to the total level of the non confromed dimension tables.
The fact also hold some non aggregated columns (baseline columns), all the base line columns where moved to a logical dim table.
The report involves both the fact tables, conformed and non conformed dimension columns.
When we built the report with all these columns the report is showing fine. But when we add the filter with the non conformed dimension the report is throwing some error.
Error Details
Error Codes: OPR4ONWY:U9IM8TAC:OI2DL65P
State: HY000. Code: 10058. [NQODBC] [SQL_STATE: HY000] [nQSError: 10058] A general error has occurred. [nQSError: 43113] Message returned from OBIS. [nQSError: 43119] Query Failed: [nQSError: 14023] None of the fact sources for D01 Date.Date are compatible with the detail filter [D05 Non Confrm Dimension.Code = 'AFS']. (HY000)
The above functionality was working fine with OBIEE 10g and have implemented it many times before.
There is one patch available for this issue but it is available only for windows 32 bit enironment.
Patch details
Patch 14210864: OBIEE 11G: CONFORMING DIMENSION SETTINGS FROM 10G NOT WORKING IN 11G
Can anyone give some suggestion or workaround? I can't do any change in Datamodel.
Thanks,
Vino

Hi Vinod,
In OBIEE 10g, we are running into similar error when we add filter from non conformed dimensions in a report, so can you please share patch download details like where to download or if we have to raise a SR for the Patch 14210864.
Thanks in Advance!!

Two facts with conformed dimension

Starting new thread per Alistair's request :)
I have two facts
Class Enrollment (who is enrolled in which classes)
External Test Scores (who got what score on what exam)
The only dimension they have in common is "Person".
Is it possible to build a presentation layer that includes both facts, the Person dimension, and dimensions that related to one fact but not the other (e.g. dimension "External Test Type" or dimension "Course")?
How would I set up the BI metadata to answer the question:
What was the average grade for Course ABC for students who scored above a 50 on test XYZ?
So far, for External Test Scores fact, I have created hierarchies(/dimensions) for any related dimension tables that didn't already have hierarchies defined. I then went to the Content tab for External Test Scores and set aggregation levels (lowest level for everything related to the fact, "total" level for everything NOT related to the fact).
I put both facts and the "Person" dimension into a presentation folder. I can query test scores ok, but when I add in a simple "Row Count" column from class enrollment, I get no data back.
Do I now go back and do the same Content tab settings for the Class Enrollment fact? My initial attempts at this yielded consistency check warnings of "Logical table source does not join to any fact source".
Huge thanks for suggestions.
-John

Hi John,
I tend to harp on a lot about the need for a hierachy on every logical dim, even just total -> detail. It allows this (non-conformed) approach for starters, also allows another developer to quickly ascertain the relationship between objects.
About the complex joins, I meant do as you will have done for a normal star with just the conformed dims, so thats Foreign keys where applicable in the Phyiscal layer, and Complex joins where applicable in the BMM layer. I just wanted to make a point that you should do this as per a normal normal star schema with fully conformed dimensions, and merely that the none-conformed dimension will only be connected to its relevant fact table - probably didnt need to say it as it may be more confusing!
Your correct with aggregation rules, ideally all objects in a logical fact should have an aggregation rule - otherwise it should be in a logical dimension.
As to the approach, this is the way i've always handled non-conformed dimensions when the requirement is to see both facts on the same report. Our Peak Indicators OBIEE training material on this subject is as follows :
"order" fact table, dimensioned by Date, Customer, Product.
"inventory" fact table dimensioned by Product only.
Report requirement - Show me all orders where the order_qty (order fact) is greater than the total qty in stock (inventory fact)
So like your example, we sum up both qty's and use a where clause to filter only rows where one fact measure is greater than another measure.
Whats the ideal approach ??
If you had control of the ETL perhaps you could seed an 'unknown' record in the non-conforming dimensions, and then reference this on the other fact table, but I'd say the majority of the time, the customer who wants everything by everything in their subject area needs a little education, its really not good for end users having 10's of folders with 10's of columns - we should be creating analysis subject areas to enable the answering of business questions, theres no reason why we cant combine reports from different subject areas on one dashboard page, all using a common set of prompts, but there really isnt a need to give an end user the whole BMM / DW etc in one go.......unless they are paying of course, and after you've tried to educate them they want it there way :-)

Obiee 11g non-conforming dimensions and nQSError 14025

Does anyone know how to configure the 11g repository for non-conforming dimensions? This worked fine in 10g. I have upgraded the repository to 11g and it doesn't work anymore. I am receiving the error [nQSError: 14025] No fact table exists at the requested level of detail. I have tried building a simple test subject area and testing different configurations, but I have not had any success.
Edited by: user10715047 on Jan 27, 2011 12:33 PM

Ah, I love answering my own questions. :/
The only way I could make this work was a follows...
1. Make sure you have a level-based dimension for each of your logical table dimensions (both conforming and non-conforming).
2. For the fact table measures, set the levels as you did in 10g with the non-conforming dimensions at the Grand Total logical level for each measure.
3. For the fact table LTSs, set the logical level in the Content tab to the dimension's lowest level for each conforming dimension (leave the non-conforming dimensions level blank).
Unfortunately, the query generated in 11g will add an additional sub-query to the mix even though it doesn't appear to have any benefit. Therefore in 10g, if you have two logical fact tables with non-conforming dimensions, three sub-queries were required to create the result set. Two queries for the facts and their related dimensions and a final full outer join to stitch the results together. In 11g, you have one query without the measures, two queries with the measures, and the final outer join.
I am talking to Oracle support about this issue, but I haven't made much progress yet. I asked development to confirm my repository design and they say it checks out. They indicated that the additional query is a design change/enhancement. I am not getting a warm and fuzzy on this one. I'll post back if I make any progress.
Oh, did I mention that this change has broken queries where I attempt to combine fields from two non-conforming dimensions?!? This worked fine in 10g.

Problem: two fact tables and one conformed dimension

Hi everyone!
I need to solve this situation:
I have two fact tables, let's say F1 and F2, that are both linked to D1, my conformed dimension
I just need to select fields from D1 but I know that, when querying, OBIEE links it to a fact table anyway..how does it choose the fact table? That is, if I only want fields from D1, does the system queries also from F1 or F2? Is it a random choice?
Is there a way to "force" this choice, telling the system for example to choose only from F1?
Is there a workaround to solve this situation? Remember, I only need fields from D1.
Thanks!!

The solution of your problem is "Implict Fact Column"
Go to presentation layer and double click on your subject area. then you will see Implict fact column option. click on set. give corresponding fact column there( in your case give F1 fact column)
references: http://oracle-bi.siebelunleashed.com/articles/implicit-fact-column/
Thanks
GSR
Edited by: GSR on Mar 20, 2012 3:22 PM

Multiple facts with non-conforming dimensions

Hi, I have a question re: using multiple facts in a report, where one of the facts has a non-conforming dimension.
I have two metrics: "PAYROLL" and "UNRECONCILED DIFFS". The payroll metric is at the employee level, but the "UNRECONCILED DIFFS" is not. Here's what I've done so far:
1. Set up a single logical fact table in the business layer
2. Created 2 LTSs. One has "employee" level, one has "all employees" (i.e. the grand total level)
3. Created metrics for PAYROLL and UNRECONCILED DIFFS, each pointed to the proper LTS
4. Set the "employee" hierarchy level for "UNRECONCILED DIFFS" to the "all employees" level
This is working...kind of. If I have three employees with a payroll amount of $1000, and there is a $500 unreconciled diff, the report shows up like:
Employee Payroll UnrecDiff
Emp1 $1000 $500
Emp2 $1000 $500
Emp3 $1000 $500
Total $3000 $500
Here's what I'm wondering...instead of having the unreconciled difference repeated for each employee...is there any way it can just be $0 or (even better) NULL, but then still show up as $500 in the total line?
Thanks!
Scott

Hi
The problem you describe is similar to mine (I wrote several threads ago).
That is, if there is a non-conformed dimension in a report then the column from the fact table which is not connected with those non-conformed dimensions containes zeros or blanks.
Was this problem solved? I didn't quite catch one of previuos messages... If you can please repeat it more detailed.
What I tried to do is to set Total level in the Content tab (LTS properties). In this example - I could set Total level to JOBS in the plan type dimension. But it didn't help.
So if you know what to do then please describe it here...

Conformed dimension and query multiple fact tables

Hello,
Please if someone can guide me on this requirement.
Requirement - I have a conformed dimension D1 and two fact tables F1 and F2. Both fact tables have many columns so I cannot merge
the two fact tables into one logical table. Currently both these fact tables have logical tables F1 and F2 respectively.
As per design the conformed dimension is a simple logical table in the rpd and not a dimension.
Can someone guide me how should i proceed so that i'll be able to fetch information from both the fact tables?
Edited by: 930542 on Apr 26, 2012 12:28 PM

Hi,
Currently the dimension table is taken as a simple logical table in rpd as it does not have have any levels or hierarchy.
Its a flat dimension. Can you guide me how can I implement a flat dimension in OBIEE? Because this dimension is taken as simple logical table
I am not able to set appropriate level for fac tables. This dimension does not appear in the list of dimensions.

OBIEE Conformed dimension with Bridge Table

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for