I have an existing MDX query returning the correct resultset. However, I want to add a filter so that for a combination of value in Hierarchy1 and Hierarchy2, the data is filtered out.
For example I have data like
H1 H2 Amount
1 1 100
2 1 50
3 1 45
I am getting a value of 100+50+45=195.
I want to filter the data for the combination H1=3 and H2=1. Expected result would be 100...
I am stuck in a situation where I want to use YTD for three different calendars of our company and don't want to create three different YTD calculations. However I want to make this work for any measure not for a particular measure
If I create one YTD and try to use in context of three calendars in SCOPE statements then it does not give my right results. Following is my syntax but It does not work.
I have some confusion on crossjoin function within MDx.while I try to crossjoin the different level sets of same Hierarchy. It shows error as
For example. ‘The Customer Geography hierarchy is used more than once in the Crossjoin function.’ select { {[Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].&[United States]}* {[Customer].[Customer Geography].[State-Province].members}} on 0 FROM [Adventure Works] WHERE Measures.[Internet Sales Amount]
Cannot we Cross joins across user defined hierarchies ,or they aren't supported .?Coz I really need to implement as above MDx within my real Cube.I try to implement by making as another Hierarchy Member but it doesn’t gives the value result as what we want/need.with
member [Customer].[Country].[United States ]as [Customer].[Customer Geography].[Country].&[United States] select { {[Customer].[Country].[United States ]}* {[Customer].[Customer Geography].[State-Province].members}} on 0 FROM [Adventure Works] WHERE Measures.[Internet Sales Amount]
Hey all. I have a query where I am basically querying an organizational chart. The table storing this information is basically a two column table of parent/child pairs. So you might have:
Querying this table should return all child columns that flow up to the top, so querying 1 would return 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11.
I used a sample from MSDN (http://www.sqljunkies.com/Article/D7CAED46-CCAC-4FF7-B528-B2E9A274B71C.scuk) that does just this, except that when querying a value that returns more than 1000 records - I am experiencing way too long response times. The MSDN sample uses temp tables and inserts values into a temp table as it moves through the records and finds a match.
Anyone have an ideas on another way to accomplish the same thing? This is an important part of my security model as users that login should only have access to data that falls within their parent/child heirarchy.
i guess really i'm looking for opinions and / or experiences of modelling organisational hierarchies.... anyone?
i'm in the process of creating a logical model (very early stages) of a new datawarehouse. The current OLTP schema stores it as a self referencing key (i.e. parent_group_id). The performance problems involved in aggregating to different levels of the hierarchy causes no end of complaints from customers, as i'm sure you can imagine. So, now we are modelling a datawarehouse for their reporting requirements, i obviously want it to be better
so far i've considered... 1) keeping it as it is 2) allocating a 'node' id and storing the left / right nodes in the hierarchy tree. we've used before when reporting over the OLTP system with report developers building it 'on the fly' as part of their report. (better explanation than mine... http://www.dbpd.com/vault/9811/kamfn.shtml ) 3) an intermediate table storing its 'position' in the hierarchy? not really played with this yet but mr kimball seems to like it see... http://www.dbmsmag.com/9809d05.html 4) denormalising it completely. i.e. level_1, level_2, level_3, Level4.... for every fact? the advantage of this is that it makes aggregation at any level really easy. the problem is that each of our customers has a different organisation hierarchy, with a different number of levels, and given the OLTP schema there is no limit to the number of levels in a hierarchy
I need to conditionally include a filter in the below DAX query such a way that if an Account_ID is passed (as client side parameter) the filter should be included in the query otherwise if it is zero, the query should return results across all account. For example, if total purchase is queried for Account_ID=2 the query should be like this:
I am trying to get a list of years from a Date dimension that includes a limited number of values. I want the current year and the previous 5 years. The year number in the cube is actually a char(4) value so I will have to cast that.
Also I want to alias the field, since Im using this list to use as a parameter in an SSRS report.
The MDX I have at the moment is this:<br/> WITH MEMBER [SALESYEAR] AS CInt([DimCalendar].[Year].CURRENTMEMBER)
SELECT NULL ON COLUMNS,FILTER( [DimCalendar].[Year].MEMBERS , [SALESYEAR] > 2012) ON ROWS FROM [MySalescube]
The above returns empty, but I also need to define an expression that is the current year - 5 years
For example, I have a Date dimension with attributes like Current Day and Current Month. If I run the following, I get exactly what I expect: a list of the days in the current month.
select NULL on 0, [Case - Date - PSPT Entry].[Year - Quarter - Month].[Date] on 1 from [Customer Support] where [Case - Date - PSPT Entry].[Current Month].&[True]
When I run the following, I'm getting a list of the days in the current month *plus the first couple days of the next month*. with
set [Days of Interest] as filter([Case - Date - PSPT Entry].[Year - Quarter - Month].[Date], [Case - Date - PSPT Entry].[Current Month].&[True]) select NULL on 0, [Days of Interest] on 1 from [Customer Support]
I'm trying to create a percentile rank function based on the standard WIKI version:
I've seen Brian Knight's article here, but that only deals with percentile.
Where I'm struggling is getting the count of members in a set using a measure, in the current context on the same hierarchy, as the filter expression. I'm using the comparative set as in belonging to the same geographical location, and therefore associating by another attribute.
So, cl as below:
MEMBER [Measures].[RegionPercentileCount] AS Count( Filter( NonEmpty( descendants(Ancestor( [Supplier].[NameMap].CurrentMember, [Supplier].[NameMap].[Region]), [Supplier].[NameMap].[Supplier Id]), [Measures].[ActiveMeasure]) , [Measures].[ActiveMeasure] < ([Supplier].[NameMap].CurrentMember, [Measures].[ActiveMeasure])))
Using the same measure and context hierarchy is always going to be equal, and therefore the count is always zero. Its almost as if I need a nested context for the FILTER which allows me to use enumerate the set on the same hierarchy whilst maintaining the external reference.
I'm thinking that perhaps I'm going to have to create another hierarchy and use that as the filter set and reference through StrToMember or similar.
I have been living in the T-SQL world for years, and am working on my first Tabular model.
I have a fact table that I would like to use for many reports. My idea is that I would use Perspectives in the tabular model to pull in the columns that I need for each purpose. In some cases, I also need to filter out some rows. Is there a way to filter perspectives? The only solution I am coming up with is to create views in SQL Server and import the fact table multiple times for each purpose. That doesn't seem very efficient.
I have a big table with several types of transsactions: PO (Puchase Orders, SO,( Sales orders), INV (Invoices) .... I want to create cubes with only one type of transactions (1 cube for PO,...)
Where and how can I filter the rows I want to use in my cube ?
The result is accurate but the query execution time is 3-4 minutes for 10 fact records, when i use multiple dimension. it is showing me 0 valus for this measure for all the members for the dimesion attribute which doen't have any customer order. example it shows all the member of date dimension. is there any way to reduce the rows. i think this is the reason to take more execution time.when i use EXCCLUDEEMPTY the result is NULL
Is it possible to filter out a measure only at the intersection of Two dimension members? I have a date dimension, a Hospital dimension and a wait time measure.
For Example, is it possible to filter out Wait time for Bayside Hospital for the Month of June 2015?
I want Wait time to continue to be displayed for all other months and roll up into the totals without the filtered value.
I am pretty new to MDX and am having trouble getting what I need out of this MDX query. Some business rules:
Gross Amount applies to all clients, whether Type A or Type B. I always want to return Gross Amount.Some clients are Type A, some are Type B, some are both, and some are neither.There are Type A Net Amount and Type B Net Amount values for all clients, but I only want to display the Type A Net value if the client is a Type A client, only Type B if the client is a Type B, or both for both, and neither for neither. I would like to return blank/null, not $0.00, for those values that should not be displayed.
Here's the basic query.
SELECT { [Measures].[Gross Amount], [Measures].[Type A Net Amount], [Measures].[Type B Net Amount] } ON COLUMNS, NON EMPTY {[Dim Client].[Parent Client Code].[Parent Client Code] * [Dim Client].[Child Client Code].[Child Client Code] * [Dim Client].[Is Type A].CHILDREN * [Dim Client].[Is Type B].CHILDREN } ON ROWS FROM ClientInfo
I have SSAS cube with Fact that include values in kg (e.g. 25.3, 32.5, 18,3...).What kind of attribute or other solution should I create If I want to filter those kg's in browser with integer values e.g.:weight between 10 and 25
I have developed a cube in my work place for analyzing current year sales with previous year sales in Time Hierarchy (Year- Quarter- Month) using Parallel period. If we want to see data for particular Quarters i.e. Q1 and Q2 then total at the year level should also get change. Currently if we only choose 2 quarters in the filter then current year data gets change, however data using parallel period is not getting change accordingly and its shows Total of full year.
One of my models has order data, cost per order/invoice ID and then dimensions on Fiscal Year, category, etc...the usual.
A user wanted to search it for an exact order amount. (They knew for example that one of our accounts was not balancing by single order worth $746.13 and assumed it must be an order that was placed but never marked shipped that slipped through the cracks).
Now, in the model I have "order amount" as a field and then a measure that sums that.
I could expose that "order amount" field as a label and let them filter on it in Excel (and that works).
However, I haven't had any luck filtering on the actual measure "Total Order Amount". Such as OrderID-> View Filter -> "Total Order Amount" equals 746.13.
I assume this is due to a few things:
Measure calculates at different levels so filtering on a measure is difficult as you would have to place all the "slicers" and set them first before the measure would "exist" at a level where it could be $746.13. Orders by year would have $746.13 as part of it's year sum, but wouldn't exist as a stand alone line item orders by year 2015 might be 2 million.
Orders by category might exist at 500,000, 8,000, 15,146.36, etc... but not $746.13.
So I would need OrderID on there as a column so the measure could return at the value of $746.13 for one row for it to match the filter?
Basically: 1. Why it can't really filter on a measure? 2. Is there a better way to accomplish this other than exposing the actual column in the fact table "order amount" as it feels like that could cause all kinds of confusion if other users try to slice/filter on that not realizing exactly what it is meant to be?
The user wants to be able, using excel, to apply a filter to all measures in every measure group. I though that I can create a dimension with a single level with two members, let´s say "on" and "off" and depending on the selected member and using an IIF statement decide which formula applies to the calculated measures.
I have serious doubts about the performance and for this technique because I am thinking as a .Net developer and not as a cube developer. Maybe it is better to resolve it scoping the measures but I cannot figure it out.
I have been following the tutorial/blog post HERE to create an annualization (or "run rate") of my Gross Amount measure. What I want to do now is exclude any period that is not "complete".
For example, if today is 9/9 then Q3 is not complete - only Q1 and Q2 are complete. And if I'm looking at it monthly then January through August are complete, but September is not.
Cells B5 and D5 look exactly as I expect and want them to be. On row 6 below under each "Gross Annualized" value I have basically just put the formula for what it's actually doing.
What I would like to see in the blue cell is $67,211,697,268 - essentially the most recent annualization for a completed period. The annualization for Q3 is misleading because the quarter has not yet completed. There's $16b in Q1 and $17b in Q2, so the measly $78m in Q3 (yellow cell) is dragging the annualization down significantly. Even worse, the Gross Amount for Q4 is being treated as a $0.00, which is further dragging down the "2015 Gross Annualized" amount in blue. In a T-SQL average calculation, for example, I think the green cell would be treated as NULL rather than $0. That's kind of the behavior I want.
So I would like to do two things:
Create a calculation (probably just a 0 or 1 flag) that indicates whether the current period is complete or not. Again, using 9/9/2015 as an example, Q2 would be complete but Q3 would not be. And August would be complete, but September would not. Make the blue cell show $67,211,697,268 - an annualization based on completed quarters only.
For whatever it's worth here is the current calculation for Gross Annualized.
CREATE MEMBER CURRENTCUBE.[Measures].[Gross YTD] AS AGGREGATE( YTD([Pay Date].[Calendar].CurrentMember) ,[Measures].[Gross Amount]), FORMAT_STRING = "Currency", VISIBLE = 0;
I have a cube that has a Dimension set up with several values some of which are bools. While Browsing in Excel or SSMS, two new values, when used as a filter shows (All) (Blank) and (True) for selections instead of (All) (True) and (False).
As I mentioned in my previous post, my "real" case is a cube with 79 dimensions, most of which virtual, have been added for convenience.
Think for instance about a time dimension... Wouldn't it be nice to get a matrix with years horizontally, months vertically and displaying say the number of order you had for each cell in the resulting grid. Ok, maybe you can do this with MDX but not in Excel, unless you create virtual dimensions for the Year and Month levels.
That's all good, but as it is, in my real case, I end up with four date dimensions for which I have to provide:
YQMD (Year, Quarter, Month & Day) hirarchized dimension YWD (Year, Week, Day) YQMD (Fiscal calendar) Year Quarter Month Week Day (as 1, .. 31) Week Day (for periodicity analysis over a week's time) Date (as individual day - this is the backbone for the virtual dimensions)
It turns out this makes 40 dimensions by itself. For the sake of it, I grouped them by 4 hierarchies, although I've seen no specific functionality off of this in the data browser or Excel, so it really seems to be only for "show".
Now in my previous post I explained how I "spread" my session count to calculate a conversion rate. Given the number of dimensions I have (very high segmentation at the order level, very limited segmentation at the session/visit level), this means my calculated cell formula looks like this (hold your breath, it's ugly):
If you read all this, you can see already the cryptic dimension names like "FRD", "FSD" and so forth... that's because with the real names ("First Refund Date", "First Ship Date", the query processor errored out... visibly there is a limit in the size of the formulas you can post!
Is there no other way to achieve this result? Basically I mean to say: if the session count is not defined at your level along this dimension, go to the root of the dimension to get the value there, this along a slew of dimensions, many of which are inherently dependent because of the usage of virtual dimensions (therefore if I wish to go to the root of my "First Refund Date" for instance, I wish to do so along all sub-dimensions... Heck, as far as I'm concerned this is conceptually only ONE dimension, just with various views upon it...
Using hierachies I was sort of hoping for the ability to have something like: [FRD].[All Hierachies].[All]
Am I just asking for too much or do I just not know (quite probable) the magic keyword that can do this?
Where this is becoming quite critical is that I actually have a calculated cell that goes as follows (abridged):
SubCube: similar as before
Calculation: [Measures].[Order Count]*CalculationPassValue((...set of all un-tied dimension roots..., [Measures].[Distributed Marketing Cost])/CalculationPassValue((...set of all un-tied dimension roots..., [Measures].[Order Count])
Now the purpose of this is to distribute external costs at the order level. In short, say that you know you spent $10,000 globally promoting a specific group of websites in commission money (you pay $1 for each order). This formula allows me to get that a specific website, with 20 orders incurred an additional marketing cost of $20. That's actually the object of my next thread's question (spreading a multiplication through the aggregations)
For the purpose of this thread I am just concerned about the size of my formulas. Renaming the dimensions seemed to "buy" me some margin and I was actually quite surprised to find that the formula still fitted in, and works, but it is only a matter of time until I have to add more dimensions and the whole thing blows up in my face. Adittionally this is obviously not pleasant to look at and maintain.
Hi, Nwebie question: is it possible to have a fact that will behave diffeerntly as the user is viewing it from different hierarchies? say i got creatin measures of a product inventory. i got a location hierarchy, as as user is 'moving up' in it (say,up by city, region, state, country...)i want to do a sum. but i also got time hierarchy, and as user begins to group by weeks, months, years... a sum makes no sense..i want LastNonEmpty or something like that. Is it possible?
Is there a good approach to modelling many heterogeneous entity typeswith that have some attributes in common?Say I have entities "employees" which share some attibutes (e.g.firstname, lastname, dateofbirth) but some subsets of employees (e.g.physicians, janitors, nurses, ambulance drivers) may have additionalattributes that do not apply to all employees. Physicians may haveattributes specialty and date of board certification, ambulancedrivers may have a drivers license id, janitors may havepreferredbroomtype and so on.There are many employee subtypes and more can be dynamically addedafter the application is deployed so it's obviously no good to keepadding attributes to the employees table because most attributes willbe NULL (since janitors are never doctors at the same time).The only solution I found for this is a generalization hiearchy whereyou have the employee table with all generic attributes and then youadd tables for each new employee subtype as necessary. The subtypetables share the primary key of the employee table. The employee tablehas a "discriminator" field that allows you to figure out whichsubtype table to load for a particular entity.This solution does not seem to scale since for each value of"discriminator" I need to perform a join with a different table. Whatif I need to retrieve 1,000 employees at once?Is that possible to obtain a single ResultSet with one SQL statementSQL?Or do you I need to iterate look at the discriminator and thenperform the appropriate join? If this kind of iteration is necessarythen obviously this generalization hierarchy approach does not work inpracticesince it would be painfully slow.Is there a better approach to modelling these kind of heterogeneousentities with shared attributes that does not involve creating a tablefor each new employee type or having sparce tables (mostly filled withNULLS)I guess another approach would be to use name/value pairs but thatwould make reporting really ugly.Seems like a very common problem. Any ideas? Is this a fundamentallimitation of SQL?Thanks!- robert
I have a date dimension and Fiscal Year is a Hierarchy in it, like April, August and October for different fiscal years. I need to populate this in a report (SSRS) in a combo box so that the user can pick the fiscal year he/she wants. When done, I want to know what is the Fiscal year start month is, like April for April Fiscal year etc.
I want to be able to implement infinite levels of Hierarchies in SQL Server (2012), in addition to being able to address issues like same child having more than one parent (eg. An Employee could end up having 2 different managers - eg. Project Manager, Delivery Manager).
One way is to have self referencing table (where each row has a parent id , referencing to a parent record - but this would not work in cases where a child has more than 1 parent).
Are there other more efficient ways? What is the best way to implement this?
I am currently looking at the capabilities in SSIS from the point of view of an ETL developer who has worked with other products eg. Informatica, Cognos DecisionStream and one of things I note is a lack of support for dimensional hierarchies.
It appears that MS have assumed that SSIS users will automatically use SSAS.
We use Hyperion Essbase. Other sites have Cognos or Business Objects for their OLAP/BI.
I would like to be able build multi-level dimension hierarchies directly from within SSIS.
