Smartview: shared members on level o has a prefix of level 1

Hi,
I'm using smartview 11.1.2.3. I have a dimension with multiple parallel hierarchies: level1a->level0, level1b->level0, level1c->level0,
as a result the level 0 members which apears below level1b and level1c are shared members. when I'm "zooming in" in"smartview" from
level1b/level1c, the shared members apears as level1a.level0 or level1b.level0. (zooming in from level1a gives a correct result ->level0),
did someone encounter this issue?
thanks,
Yuval

Yuval check this Oracle - Hyperion Labs......: Smart View issues with alternate Hierarchy - Surprises in Essbase Part V
Seems like something changed (maybe from a patch in 11.1.2.2, not sure about the patch because I've a vanilla 11.1.2.2 with this issue) from 11.1.2.2
Regards
Celvin
http://www.orahyplabs.com

Similar Messages

Level building/shared members

Can you generate shared members when level building your dimensions?

I'm afraid I have to disagree with the previous 2 posters. You can build shared members when you use a level build method. I do it all the time. Assume your level zero member is in a primary and secondary rollup and that there are 3 parents in the firs rollup and 2 in the second, the format of the load rule would be:
Lev0,Lev1,Lev2,Lev3,lev1,Lev2

Aliases for shared members in Smartview

Hi All Gurus,
I am using Oracle EPM 11.1.2.3. I migrated an EPMA planning application from 11.1.2.2 to 11.1.2.3. The Alias for Shared members are not getting displayed When I access through Smartview ,instead it is showing as [Parent].[child] . But When I access the same application in 11.1.2.2, I can see the Alias.
How to fix this?

It is been identified as a bug have a read of this Oracle - Hyperion Labs......: Smart View issues with alternate Hierarchy - Surprises in Essbase Part V
Regards
Celvin
http://www.orahyplabs.com

Financial Reporting Studio - Suppress Shared Members During Entity Prompt

I am trying to create a Financial Reporting Studio report where the entity members that are displayed as a prompt only reflect the entities the user has access to with only one occurrence in the list. I have tried the following scenarios with no luck.
In Workspace, the Financial Reporting Preference, the Setup User POV option "Member Selection Displays" is set to "Only Members I Can Access" and not "All Members Regardless of Access".
The Financial Report is set up so that the user is prompted for the Entity so they can select multiple entities to run the report.
This works fine, except this is also displaying the shared members in the alternate hierarchies when responding to the Entity prompt.
As part of Defining the prompt, I have included the main entity structure in the "Choices List" in hopes that the shared members wouldn't display as an option to select, but this ends up displaying all of the entities in the hierarchy overriding what is the Financial Reporting Preference (acts like "All Members Regardless of Access"). I have also tried the Union of "Suppress shared members" and "Same level as" a level zero entity, but I'm still seeing all of the members of the main entity hierarchy, rather than a list of entities the user has access to.
Is there a way to display all of the entities only once that a user has access to during a prompt for a report? I would greatly appreciate any advice. Thanks in advance!!

I don't think there's a native way to do this in HFR. How could it be done other than through creating a custom selection list? Okay, I guess that is one way but it hurts my brain to think about maintaining it unless it could maybe be done through IDESCENDANTS of 1 and 2.
Here are two other thoughts:
1) Write a report against the Planning (I could be wrong about you using Planning as you specify Essbase, but the question is in the Planning board) tables to get this information. I don't know how to do it, but I'm guessing with some SQL gyrations it should be possible.
2) Stick an attribute against hierarchies 1 & 2 and report on them that way. You the designer already know that they are related. More maintenance on the front end, but a surefire way to get the member list out.
Regards,
Cameron Lackpour

Impact if I add many shared members...

Hi,
I currently have a dim say Mgttax..
There is a requirement now to maintain a new roll up under Mgttax which is going to have all the leaf members which are currently now under Mgttax..
All the current leaf members are stored now...
As they are going to be duplicate they will be as Shared members..
So if I add all these members to a new rollup which has all the lead members as shared members...will theere be any impact on the calc time..i mean will it increase the calc time??
I'll have only two roll ups under the new roll up...
Say original dim is mgttax which has many roll ups and all the leaf members are stored...
I add a new rollup(say NEW) just below the top parent Mgttax under which i have only 2 roll ups(say X and Y)
and all the leaf children which are now will go to any one of the 2 roll ups(either X or Y) under the new roll up(NEW)
By this will there be any major impact???
Thanks in advance..

If the shared members are split evenly between the two parents, thats 1000 members per parent, It's worse if it's uneven. If possible I would suggest adding more levels in your share (If possible) to reduce the number of blocks that have to be read to create a perent. If you can't then try calcfrombottomup (Look for the correct spelling in the function reference and read the disclamer). At any rate 2000 members is not terrible depending on the number of dimension and the number of members in the other dimensions of your cube.

Access on Shared Members not working in reports

In our entity dimensions, we have all of our base members listed in under a parent folder, with permission assigned to each base member to allow access (not at the folder level).
We then have another parent folder which includes Regions, and then the base members are included under the appropriate region as a shared members. On the Region folders, we have iDescendants access setup for all the shared members.
When running reports, if a user who has access to the Region folders selects the Region folder, then they can see a consolidated report for all the shared members, but if they click on a specific shared member, they cannot see any numbers.
It looks like those shared members are not inheriting permissions from the parent folder. This was working before, and recently stopped.
Does anyone know what needs to be done to get the permission to start inheriting from the parent folder to the shared members?

Did a Refresh on Shared Members from Planning > Administration > Manage Database and this solved this issue.

Need help in Shared Members

Hi All,
Could you please help me how to assign the Shared members for bottom level members in a dimension using rule files. will Allow moves and Allow property changes will this help us in assign shared members for bottom level members ?
Thanks,
Raj.

Could anybody please help me out in building out shared members in an outline where *"Duplicate Member names allowed"* is set to true ?
As an example, Suppose I've the below hierarchy:
DIM_I
- Parent-I
- Child-I
- Child-II
- Child-III
- Parent-II
- Child-IV
- Child-II (Shared Member)
In the above example, as is obvious, I'd like to share the member Child-II of Parent-I with its clone in Parent-II.. Please note that this outline has some other dimensions wherein duplicate members are required but not as shared ones.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks

Shared members and dynamic calc

I am trying to replicate a new cube from current GL cube and wish to remove unused shared members if they have any impact on essbase.
2/3 of my accounts (dense) member is stored with the remainder being shared members. Shared members do not add to block size. But having so many of them, does it impact on calc scripts or retrievals or any other impacts?
Secondly, in accounts and divisions, we have four levels. except for level 0, the remaining levels are all dynamic calc. Division is sparse member. Its not advisable to have dynamic calc on dense dimension. What about sparse dimension like division? Will it be better to change level 2&3 to dynamic and change level 1 to store as well?
We have also been advised by our consultant to change accounts to sparse dimension considering the number of times we need to update outline for new members (stored and shared).
Dimension          Type          Stored     Shared
Measure               Dense     1378     796     rest
Time               Dense     106     13     rest
Year               Dense     9     8
Currency          Sparse     12     9
Scenario          Sparse     41     38
Market               Sparse     20     12
Division          Sparse     490     302     rest
Product               Sparse     635     308
Reportcode          Sparse     327     299

Hi,
Having shared members in dense hierarchy will not have much of impact on Cube size or retrieval performance.
but its always advisable to avoid unnecessary hierarchies (shared or stored or dynamic).
Having top level dense members as dynamic lines is a good design but having sparse dynamic calc will impact retrieval performance.
its not at all advisable to make sparse members as dynamic calc but if needed we can make sparse members with very few children as dynamic calc (or dynamic calc & store). yet again its not advisable to have a dynamic calc children to a sparse stored parent as this will affect the batch calculation while aggregating parent sparse member.
And as suggested by your consultant it is feasible to make the dimension getting modified more often, as a sparse dimension as this will reduce the restructuring time (sparse restructure will take less time compared to dens restructure).
But that alone cannot be considered as factor as there are many other factors to be considered for making a dimension sparse.
- Krish

Multiple hierarchies with shared members

Hello,
is it just a common practice to have unique parents for hierarchies built on the same Essbase dimension, or it is a system level restriction?
Only in Hyperion Planning, or this is true also on Essbase level?
Is it right that only the leaf nodes can be shared members?
(automatic shared members are created on higher levels for parents with 1 child, so why other shared members not allowed?)
Thank you for your answer!

I'm not sure I follow your question completely, but for shared member rollups the lowest level of the shared rollup can be a level zero or higher member or another dimension. The requirement is that a shared member can not have descendants in the shared rollup, it would be the lowest level.
For example If I have the following primary rollup
Geography
East
NJ
NY
PA
West
Ca
OR
WA
I could have an alternamte rollup like
Bob's Total
NY (Shared)
West (Shared)
You see thar NY is a level zero member and West is a level 1 member but under the alternate rollup the are both level zero members

Multiple shared members in ASO outline

 I am building an outline with one primary and three alternate hierarchies within one of the dimensions of an Aggregate Storage (ASO) cube. All of the leaf members in each of the alternate hierarchies are shared members of a member in the primary hierarchy. The non-shared member is a leaf in some cases and a summary point in others. All hierarchies are stored. When I try to save the outline, I get a long list of verification errors. For the stored members to which the shared members refer, Essbase is complaining that "This member has multiple copies of same shared member in at least one stored hierarchy. See other messages for which members and which hierarchies." For the shared members, Essbase complains that "Aggregate storage outlines only allow a shared member once in a stored hierarchy." For the alternate hierarchies, Essbase complains that "This stored hierarchy has multiple copies of same shared member. Remove extra member or change hierarchy to be dynamic." However, I did a find on a handful of the members that Essbase was complaining about and in all cases have found only one instance of each shared member in each alternate hierarchy. The same shared member might appear in two or more alternate hierarchies, but I have not found a case where it appears more than once in the same hierarchy. I have also ensure the following: <UL>The primary hierarchy occurs first in the outline, so non-shared members always appear before any instances of any of the shared members.</UL> <UL>There are no shared members in the primary hierarchy.</UL> <UL>All members, non-shared and shared, are in the same dimension.</UL> <UL>Non of the stored hierarchies contain both a non-shared instance and a shared instance of the same member.</UL> I have tried making the alternate hierarchies dynamic, but query retrievals are so slow that they're completely unacceptable to the client. Has anyone encountered a similar problem? Is there a solution to this? 

I heard back from Hyperion Tech Support again. Turns out it's not a defect after all. It's actually a subtle technicality in the restrictions on shared members with ASO. The first restriction, which is explained in the outline verification error message, is that you can only have one instance of a shared member within a given stored alternate hierarchy. The second restriction is that you cannot have any shared members within a given stored alternate hierarchy where the non-shared instances of the members are ancestors/descendants of each other. Unfortunately, when this restriction is violated, EAS gives the same error message as it does for the first restriction, so it's a bit harder to debug. Hope this saves someone some grief. -Silvester

Shared Members in Load Rules

Hello,I am trying to build a dimension build load rule.How do you create shared members within a dimension? Does it have to be through a parent-child load rule? What if you have a subset of a dimension, (eg duplicate hierarchy) with more then two levels, ie parent child? How do you create shared memebers then?Any help would be greatly appreciated.Thanks.

I'm a newbie in dim build using load rule too. I'd a bunch of products that had to be in 2 roll-up structures, apparently as shared members in one of them. It took little effort to build the first roll-up using a generation build method. Just when I thought it was gonna be a slam dunk, I couldn't create the second roll-up. I kept trying different load options but it just wouldn't work. I noticed the "Do Not Share" check box was always disabled. So I clicked on the different build method buttons. I noticed that the box become enable when I selected the parent/child method. I tried and it turned out to work fine. So, for the little knowledge I have, it seems you must use the parent/child rule to create shared members.

Shared Members Problem

Hi,I want to start using the Shared Members option for one of my applications in EAS 7.1.0, but have amended the outline and loaded data but the Shared members are appearing in my data twice, therefore duplicating my sales figures in excel add-in, which isn't what I want, I just want the part to be added once, so almost as if one part doesn't get calculated. Can anyone help me with this?? Many ThanksSarah

As Sreenivas said, change the consolidation to tilde.However, I would put a word of caution on what/how you do this.Typically, a hierarchy has one "primary" roll-up, where all the members are listed only once, and the hierarchy has an organized rollup. In addition, there may be "alternate" roll-ups. These hierarchies have internal consistencies that roll-up to a given point, but no further.What I mean by this is, that you should consider finding the 'root' location of the shared roll-ups, and mark it as non-aggregating (~), but the shared members themselves should aggregate to provide the alternate hierarchy it's own internal consistency.After working out the reason for the distinction between the main and alternate hierarchies, it becomes fairly obvious that your main roll-up will be 100% of your non-shared members, and the alternates may contain subsets.Example:Product has children "All Products", and "Discount Products", "All Products" will contain them all and aggregate to the Product root member. "Discount Products" contains a subset that aggregate up to itself, but it doesn't aggregate to the Product root member. You may have additional "alternate hierarchies", but only one will be your "full roll-up".Note: This example ignores the use of UDA's or attribute dimensions for doing this same thing, for illustrative purposes.-Doug

Shared Members in Dimensions - security question

Within the dimension security, do shared members take the security based on their base member or on the parent member?
For example, if we have a base member setup under "Homes" like this:
Homes > examplehome
and then a shared member for "examplehome" setup like this:
Region1 > examplehome(shared)
And the "Homes" and "Region1" folder have different security setup for iDescendants, will "examplehome(shared)" take the security from "Homes" or "Region1"?

I've never investigated this but does it really matter? The data for examplehomes is only stored in one place. The share just gives you alternate aggregation paths. My guess is that once you set security for one all instances of the member share the security. After all, if you place examplehomes on a form with no parent, planning has no idea which parent to use.
Dave

Shared members issue

Hi to all,
I've a Problem with the shared members in a excel spreadsheet. I need to see all members in a specific dimension (shared members included). using members selection dialog box, i'm using the view method "by generation name" and the output option Supress shared members (cleared) but the shared members are filtered in the results. Using by level name is the same result.
could you help me?
I'm usign essbase 9.0 and add in vs 9.0
Thanks in advance

Certainly sounds odd... did you check the preview to see if they show up there?
I'm just thinking it might be a post processing issue, because I haven't heard of this being an issue before so if it is there may be some option setting that is tripping it up.
Let us know if they show up in the preview -- and if you have a suitable way to test other outlines or dimensions with similar circumstances it might help to check the preview on them as well.

Building shared members using rules file

How to build Shared members in the outline using load rule file.
I tried but it is not working correctly.

Hi,
If you are loading the build file in parent child format...you don't need to mention the member as shared or stored.
Essbase automatically makes the second one shared.
If you are using generations or levels format to build the dimension then I suggest you to refer the docs to understand it clearly.
http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E10530_01/doc/epm.931/esb_dbag.pdf
Thanks,
Jeeth

Smartview: shared members on level o has a prefix of level 1

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for