Budget On Different Granularity In Organization Hierarchy (which Is SCD)
May 27, 2008
Hi everyone
I am struggling with adding budget numbers to a cube. The main reason being that the budget is *not* on the finest granularity (employee) with regard to the organization hierarchy but on a coarser one (team).
The organization hierarchy is a "flat" (not parent-child) hierarchy that looks about like that:
employee -> team -> teamgroup -> region -> country
As mentioned I now have budget numbers that are defined on the team-level (not on the employee level as "regular" measures). I would know assume that I could put the budget data into its own table and "link" it with the organization through the "team" attribute. I would do that on the "dimesion usage"-tab.
The problem with this approach is that the organization is changing (SCD type 2). This essentially means that by linking to the "team" attribute the aggregation of the budget data on higher levels of the organization hierarchy can be ambiguous (at least that is what I understand).
That would mean that on some point in time team 2 (consisting of one employee, Jeanne) moved from teamgroup 2 to teamgroup 3. Just for the sake of a simple example.
Now, what am I to do with my budget data in this situation? I cannot link it to the teamId, because teamId = 2 for example cannot specify if the value should be aggregated into teamgroup 2 or teamgroup3...
I have a feeling that this got something to do with the design of the organization-table but I am unsure about what the actual problem is. Any hint, pointer or solution would be appreciated. If the question is unclear, please let me know and I will try to clarify.
I need to write a sql that generate the hierarchy in an organization.
Below an example
emplid empname supervisor_id superv_name 1 subu null null 2 vid 1 sub 3 ram 4 satis 4 satis 2 vid
I need an output to this query as below and also one important the supervisor ie supervisor_id and name is null is the top level,every employee also has to report to him and also to his all above supervisors.
Whoever joining new to org the hierarchy
empid empname supervisor_id superv_name 3 ram 4 satis 4 satis 2 vid 2 vid 1 subu 4 satis 1 subu 3 ram 1 subu 3 ram 2 vid 5 kumar 1 subu 5 kumar 4 satis 5 kumar 2 vid 1 subu null null
I need to write a sql that generate the hierarchy in an organization.Below an example
emplid empname supervisor_id superv_name 1 subu null null 2 vid 1 sub 3 ram 4 satis 4 satis 2 vid
i need an output to this query as below and also one important the supervisor ie supervisor_id and name is null is the top level,every employee also has to report to him and also to his all above supervisors.whoever joinng new to org the hierachy should be follwed
empid empname supervisor_id superv_name 3 ram 4 satis 4 satis 2 vid 2 vid 1 subu 4 satis 1 subu 3 ram 1 subu 3 ram 2 vid 5 kumar 1 subu 5 kumar 4 satis 5 kumar 2 vid 1 subu null null
This is related to the example FOODMART database which comes with Analysis Services.
You must have come across the neat trick that is used in the Budget cube and how a parent levels show the sum of the child levels even when both of them appear to show +ve values but the parent works by treating some of the child values as negative while treating some as +ve.
For example if you browse the budget cube, you'll see a row for Net Sales having a value of 398K (rounded). But when you drill down, you'll see 2 child records of Net Sales
Sales 565K (rounded) Expenses 167K (rounded)
Do you see that even though the figures for Sales and Expenses appear as positive but when these are rolled up /aggregated, the budget cube knows which value is to be taken as +ve and which is to be taken as -ve. Otherwise the parent (Net Sales) would have shown an incorrect figure of 732K (565+167 = 732).
This is basically the idea which I alo want to use but am not clear how to approach this :S
--acts as a transaction table CREATE TABLE #TestData ( id int not null identity(1,1) primary key, account varchar(10) not null, deposit int not null
[Code] ....
--desired results -- within each account group, when a individual record causes the groups running total to exceed the group's budget, show the difference that causes the groups running total to exceed the budget as unbudgeted. The amount of that transaction upto the budget amount show as renewal. For any succeeding individual records in the group, the amount of that transaction is Unbudgeted.
I have a fact table with sales data at line item level, meaning lots of rows with sales orders, revenue etc. per product group pr month. Then I have a budget table with the budgetted revenue pr product group pr month, meaning a lot less detailed. I followed the method at daxpatterns.com/budget-patterns/Â with the headline "Complete pattern" to make it work. Now I have a working data model where I can see actual and budget as seperate values.
I then need to calculate the actual revenue month to date and the budgetted revenue month to date. For actual it has worked fine by doing:
The problem occurs for me doing the same on the budget figure. Since I don't have a budget per day, but only at "YearMonth" level, I have calculated the amount of workdays per month and then used the DatesMTD formula to get the cumulative workdays during the month. Furthermore I calculated the total amount of workdays in the month and made a ratio between this figure and the cumulative workdays so I get a figure in percent that tells me per day how much of the month that has went by (0-100 %). I would then multiply this percentage with the budget and get the budget month to date. This does not work since my budget figure is not at day level.
How I can get it to work. My desired result will be all the dates during a month in my rows and then actual revenue Month to date in values and a corrosponding figure for the budget.
I was looking at the new index locking granularity option available in 2005. I did not understand in what case can this be a performance enhancement. Has anybody looked into this ?
I understand the log files (LDF ) and data files (mdf ) should be on a different drives . I believe it leads to greater availabilty and speed . Are there any other reasons for to keep this on a separate drive.
Also what considerations I should take care while creating a database of around 100 GB . (use of filegroups , growth % etc ). Is there any connection of number of users to number of disks SQL data file to be spread to . Also do I need to take care (through hardware / software for a Quad core CPU ) to take full advanage of Quad core CPU.
Any recomendations on how to store organization trees on a database withlots of paths and branches? Any white papers out there that explain this?Thanks
Hi, I got inventory fact table. For the past two weeks, I got on a daily level; beyond that, weekly level, and beyond that monthly. I need to tie it all in to the time dimension of course €“ and the problem is, how do I do it on different granularity? As far as time dimension, tn the datamart, I got tables dim_date with key column date_id (int) , and correspondingly dim_week with week_id(int) and dim_month with month_id(int).
What I€™ve done so far, is created a time dimension from dim_date table (meaning granularity=daily) and simply tied in all the inventory €“ daily, weekly, monthly, on the day level (it all has date_id field in it, even the weekly and the monthly. Its simply the day of the end of week or end of month) I didn€™t tie anything to dim_week and dim_month. Does that makes sense? The result is kind of strange. I cant upload an image here, but€¦ well it seems ok, I got year, week (€˜GL Week€™) and then €¦ this is the annoying thing: why am I getting a €˜date€™ column, when I only want it by week or by month? I can€™t make that column disappear (e.g when in time hierarchy I only group by month, still a €˜day€™ column will be there, and will show 4 days€¦ the 4 €˜end of week€™ that comes from €˜date_id€™.) How do I make it go away??
Hi all, I have a big problem with the design and the queries of a couple of tables. I have to calculate the weighted average of the number of days between an invoice and the sum of its payments (rateal payments), weighting this number with the invoice's amount, and only when the sum of the invoice's payments equal invoice amount. I have designed two FactTables to accomplish this:
Example: data in the fist table (FactInvoice) looks like this:
Let's suppose that I'm querying the cube for the customer 1234567, at the date 2008-05-01. I need to sum the payments for the first invoice multiplicating it for the count of days elapsed, then divide the number by the InvoiceAmount (or PaymentsAmount, is the same) : (0 days * 500‚¬ + 5 days * 500‚¬ + 10 days * 800‚¬ + 13 days * 1200)/3000‚¬ = 8,7 days of weighted average to cash an invoice.
How can I do this with Analisys Services ? Is it too complicated ? Here, in the southern Italy, the problem of customer's debit is heavily felt, and total like this are really important! Any help or suggestion will be really appreciated.
I have several sub reports and some graphics I don't necessarily want the users to see or open. Is there a way to hide items from view but still have them available for execution? I tried creating a sub folder and moving the sub reports but the calling reports couldn't find them.
Hi I have a few things to clear up and I hope i can find some answers in here. I have an application written in C# using COM+ components This application is intended to support a few hundred users at the same time and each action user leads to a few updates on several tables. The problem is that 2 or more users might do this thing the same time meaning that each users should update rows that "belong" the other users . I rely on the appearance of deadlocks in order to keep the data consistent, so only one of the users should be able to have this action completed, the transactions for the other concurrent users should abort. Basically the results would be the same no matter which user will complete the transaction so the only issue is to have only one action completed. So far so good, it seems that I have no problems and that the data is consistent.
Now the reason why I'm here would be that lately i see that the number of deadlocks has increased considerably and there should be no reason for this to happen; the situations when the users would modify each others data are somehow rare and I should see a few hundred deadlocks daily So what i think is that SQL might increases the lock granularity to table or page instead of using row locks(I am not sure it's just a wild guess) From what I've read, sql starts with default row lock and it might increase it when necessary.
And now finally the question: can I force sql to use only row lock? and if yes are there any risks involved? Is sql capable to maintain only this kind of lock and still be able to manage the transactions correctly? And another question, how do deadlock decrease overall performance?
What are some recommended methods for deploying SQL Express throughout an entire organization? It appears that Active Directory/GPO deployment is out of the equation.
In a large organization who would typically be tasked with support ing SSIS - the database team, an application team, etc... SSIS is new to our Organization, we are attempting to put it into the correct organization. We current have SSRS that is supported by an application team, the SS DB is supported by the DB team.
I like the new gig a lot. Real busy, smart folks and I have been in high demand since 5 minutes after my butt hit the chair. I already have code in production.
Anyhow, we have a security situation on the sql servers I pointed out on my first day. So they want me to roll everything over to Windows Authentication and give the developers and report writers more restricted rights inside SQL Server. So they have NT Groups for different kinds of users and all of that jazz and I layed on the typical stuff about using NT groups vs individual accounts and ease of admin vs granularity of control. Well the boss came back and said he wants ease of admin and granularity of control over security. So, does anyone have any fresh thinking on turning my eitheror into an AND.
I have just been running a query which I was planning on improving by removing a redundant GROUP BY (there are about 20 columns, and one of the columns returned is atomic, so will mean that the "group by" will never manage to group any of the data) but when I modified the query to remove the grouping, this actually seems to slow the query, and I can't see why this would be the case.
Both queries return the same number of rows (69000), as I expected, and looking at the query plan, then they look nearly identical, other than at the start, there is a "stream aggregate" and "sort" being performed. The estimated data size is 64MB for the non-grouped query (runs in 6 min 41 secs), vs 53MB for the aggregated query (runs in 5 min 31 secs), and the estimated row size is smaller when aggregated.
Can rationalise this? In my mind, the data that is being pulled is identical, plus there is extra computation for doing an unnecessary aggregation, so the aggregated query should be unquestionably slower, but the database engine has other ideas; it seems to be able to work more quickly when it needs to do unnecessary work :) Perhaps something to do with an inefficient query plan for the non-aggregated query? I would have thought looking at the actual execution plan might have made this apparent, but both plans look very similar.
Edit: More information, the "group by" query had two aggregations on it, a count of one of the columns, and an average of another one. I changed this so that it was just "1" instead of the count, and for the average, I changed it to be the expression within the average aggregate, since the aggregation effectively does not do anything.
I want to remove the month and have one total per organization number, as well as remove NULL as show as 0.
Code: select * from yearproduction pivot( sum(Gas_Prod) for Year in ([2008], [2009], [2010], [2011], [2012])) as YearlyProduction order by Organization_Number, Month
I am modelling two fact tables of Actuals and Budget which are at different granularity, Actuals are at day, customer and product sub category level. Budgets are at month, Region and Product category level.
Month, Region and Product Category is present in Date, Region and Product Category dimension respectively. I have only three dimensions as Customer, Product and Date. Linking those dimensions to Actual Fact table is not an issue, what is the best way and options are there to link budget fact table to those three dimensions.
HI! I am new in DB so I need some advices for finding the right solution. I need to be able to make automatically any join between tables which the user choose and deliver the result. is like making an hierarchy between all tables in DB (parent-child) and then making the select statement for the right join.
if u have any idea about how can I manage this, pls help me.
I have an Interesting situation that I'm hoping some of you experts can help me with basically I have the following hierarchy:
Net Profit .....Gross Profit ..........Revenue ..........Direct Costs .....Indirect Expense
Now, I have another hierarchy - separate from the above - that I need to assimilate to the hierarchy above - Example:
Expenses .....Node a ..........Child a (Indirect Expense Type) .....Child b (Direct Cost type) Net Sales Adjustments .....Child a (Revenue type) .....Child b (Revenue type)
Depending on the type, the top most node needs to be assigned to the appropriate node in the initial hierarcy, like this:
Net Profit ....Gross Profit ........Revenue ................Net Sales Adjustments ....................Child a (Revenue type) ....................Child b (Revenue type) ........Direct Costs ...........Expenses .................Child b (Direct Cost type) ........Indirect Expense ............Expenses .................Node a .....................Child a (Indirect Expense Type)
Now, I've been able to figure out how to assign the top most node and leafs if all the children have the same type (using the expan stored proc listed in the books online), but my question is on this portion:
Expenses .....Node a ...........Child a (Indirect Expense Type) .....Child b (Direct Cost type)
Basically, the answer is to work backwards - if a child has a type that is different than the other children, a copy of the hierarch (up to the child) needs to be made and assigned to the appropriate initial node.
I've tried modifying the expand stored proc to give me the lineage of the child and see if there's a way I can copy the node and place it appropriately - I'm brainfried at this point, and I'm hoping that someone outthere can point me in the right direction.
Hai everyone., i need to get solution for tree hierarchy in sql is there any solution or any keyword like 'connect by prior' in oracle .. plz help me on this..
for example: id | FName |parentid | 1 | sandy | 2 | robert| 1
if i give the parentid 1 in where condition of a query i need the details of 'sandy'
Hi, I'm trying to figure out how to write I SP on the following table that will produce the results show at the bottom. My main problem is the sorting, is there a way I loop through the records in TSQL and ORDER BY SortSort where the ParentID's are the same?
i tried on CTE but iam not gettng correct result plz help me
Declare @TMaster Table (MasterId int, Type varchar(100), ParentMasterId int) Insert into @Tmaster Select 1, 'Fixed', 14 Union All Select 2, 'Flexible',14 union All Select 3, 'Others',14 union All Select 13, 'Retirement benefits',1 union All Select 14, 'PBHeads', 0
Select * From @Tmaster
Declare @TDetails Table ( MasterId Int, Description varchar(100)) Insert into @TDetails Select 1, 'Basic' union all Select 1,'Conveyance' union all Select 1,'HRA' union all Select 1,'Special Allowance' union all Select 2, 'Children Education' union all Select 2,'Travel Allowance' union all Select 2,'Medical Expenses' union all Select 2,'Variable Spl Pay' union all Select 3, 'Project Allowance' union all Select 3,'Quarterly Incentive' union all Select 3,'Shift Allowance' union all Select 3,'Annual Component' union all Select 13,'Provident Fund' union all Select 13,'Gratuity' union all Select 13,'Super annuation'
Select * From @TDetails
in group list we have to show fixed, flexible, other in subgroups(L1) list under fixed we have to show Basic salary, HRA, Conveyance, Special Allowance,Retirement benefits
in subgroup(L2) we have to show Gratuity, providedfund, Super annuation they are subgroups of retirementbenefits
output : Group Subgroup(L1) Subgroup(L2) Fixed Basic salary HRA Conveyance Special Allowance Retirement benefits Provident Fund Gratuity Super annuation
Flexible reimbursements LTA/Group Travel Medical expenses Children education variable special pay
Others Project allowance Performance incentive Medical insurance
I also have the following query (again ive stripped out the non-relevant fields)
SELECT TOP (100) PERCENT SUM(dbo.RECORD.Stock_Held_Number) AS TotalStock, CATEGORY.Name AS FundName FROM CATEGORY LEFT OUTER JOIN dbo.RECORD ON CATEGORY.ID = dbo.RECORD.CATEGORY_id GROUP BY CATEGORY.Name, RECORD.Stock_Held_Number
At the moment its grouping all the CATEGORIES and giving me a sum total for each which is great.
The problem I have is the CATEGORY table, there is an optional join to parent CATEGORY records on the table.
What Im trying to do is to provide a fully ordered result within the CATEGORIES and I don't have a clue.
For example:
The CATEGORY table has the following values ID Name Parent_Category_id 1 Pens 2 Animals 3 Rocks 4 Horses 2 5 Dogs 2
When I currently run the query I get: Name TotalStock Pens 20 Animals 30 Rocks 40 Horses 50 Dogs 60
It's technically correct because I don't want the parent to calculate the total value of the children
What Im really trying to do is order them within the hierarchy though and indent (if possible) the result so I would get
I have structure:FolderId, FolderName, ParentFolderId, FullPathe.g.1, First, null, First2, Sec, 1, First/Sec.....When update happens to FolderName, i need to update all FullPaths thatare below Folder which is changing.Any ideas?Thank you.
Greetings!I could really use some suggestions on how to improve on thefollowing, it at all possible:Table 'Customer'---------------------ID GUID PK....Table 'Facility'-----------------ID GUID PKCustomerID GUID FK (FK to Customer GUID)....Table 'Rate'----------------ID PKOwnerID GUID Nullable FK (FK to Customer, Facility GUID PK)OwnerLevel INT Contraint 1-3<Rate Data>Table 'Rate' is a sparse hierarchy of data. There are 3 possiblelevels in the hierarchy as follows:OwnerID <NULL>OwnerLevel 1This indicates Global rate data.OwnerID <Customer.ID>OwnerLevel 2This indicates Customer-specific rate data.OwnerID <Facility.ID>OwnerLevel 3This indicates Facility-specific rate data.Now, a given Customer need not have an entry in the Rate table. If aCustomer does not have an entry, it is supposed to 'inherit' Globalrate data. A given Facility need not have an entry in the Rate table.If a Facility does not have an entry, it is supposed to inheritCustomer-specific rate data, and in the absence of an entry for theFacility's parent Customer, it is supposed to inherit Global ratedata.The challenge is that I want to write a view to give me back theappropriate rate record for Customer and Facility. Here's what I'vedone so far.View _Rate--------------SELECTRate.*,NULL AS TargetIDFROMRateWHERERate.OwnerID IS NULLUNIONSELECTRate.*,Customer.ID AS TargetIDFROMRateCROSS JOINCustomerWHERERate.OwnerID IS NULLOR Rate.OwnerID = Customer.IDUNIONSELECTRate.*,Facility.ID AS TargetIDFROMRateCROSS JOINFacilityWHERERate.OwnerID IS NULLOR Rate.OwnerID IN (Facility.CustomerID, Facility.ID)View view_Rate--------------------SELECT_Rate.*FROM_RateINNER JOIN(SELECTTargetID,MAX(OwnerLevel) AS OwnerLevelFROM_RateGROUP BYTargetID) AS Filtered_RateON_Rate.TargetID = Filtered_Rate.TargetIDAND _Rate.OwnerLevel = Filtered_Rate.OwnerLevelThe combination of these two views gives a resultset that contains 1record for every Target ID as follows:TargetID <NULL>OwnerID <NULL>OwnerLevel 1This indicates Global rate data established at the Global level.TargetID <Customer.ID>OwnerID <NULL>OwnerLevel 1This indicates Customer rate data for the specific Customer identifiedby Customer.ID is inherited from the Global rate data.TargetID <Customer.ID>OwnerID <Customer.ID>OwnerLevel 2This indicates Customer-specific rate data for the specific Customeridentified by Customer.ID (not inherited).TargetID <Facility.ID>OwnerID <NULL>OwnerLevel 3This indicates Facility rate data is inherited from the Global ratedata.TargetID <Facility.ID>OwnerID <Customer.ID>OwnerLevel 2This indicates Facility rate data for the specific Facility identifiedby Facility.ID is inherited from the Facility's parent Customer'sCustomer-specific rate data.TargetID <Facility.ID>OwnerID <Facility.ID>OwnerLevel 3This indicates Facility-specific rate data for the specific Facilityidentified by Facility.ID (not inherited).I know this is a lengthy post, and a complicted query scenario, butI'm not willing to accept that my solution is the best solution justyet. Please consider that I really need this functionality in a VIEWas much as possible.Thank you for your learned consideration.I eagerly await your replies.Darryll
Hi everybody, I've been reading the book MCITP Self-Paced Training Kit (Exam 70-441): Designing Database Solutions by Using Microsoft SQL Server(TM) 2005 (Self-Paced Training Kits) as a part of my preparation for exam 70-441 The book is really clear, and I could understand everything easily because I've some experience as a database developer. Until now, there's only one thing that I didn't fully understand: On pages 53 and 54, it mentions a type of hierarchy called: a graph hierarchy, and it gives a small example made the things even more complicated I've many books about database design theories, but they don't use the term (graph hierarchy) any where... So, I appreciate if you can point me to an online resource or a book that discusses this term thorougly.
