Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

User avatar
Alan Kirk
Site Admin
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 2:30 am
OLAP Product: TM1
Version: PA2.0.6 Classic(PAW-free zone)
Excel Version: 2010 and Office 365
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Alan Kirk » Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:40 pm

Wim Gielis wrote:
Mon Jul 19, 2021 5:38 pm
Wim Gielis wrote:
Sun Jul 18, 2021 12:17 am
Should it not be changed by IBM, then I can see a number of consequences:
- editing a PRO file directly in a text editor and rebooting TM1 becomes a very risky undertaking
- when upgrading to those newer versions and using Architect, one should be absolutely sure that all processes are correct with respect to syntax.

Two very important messages if you ask me.
After a careful inspection by an IBM engineer, S. Seigneurie, it appears that there were 25 variables in the file.
Yet the line indicating the count of the variables, said 28.
I honestly don't know if I did that myself, or that this was the result of using any of the TM1 clients and ending up with that wrong count.
When the count is corrected, the crashes and losses are not there anymore.
Was the data source a cube view, or had it been in the past? Those always have the three extra "hidden" variables of (off the top of my head) sValue, nValue and Value_Is_String. The 577 variable count includes those when the process is created in the Editorsaurus, but if the source type were to be changed by hacking the file to something other than a view then it may cause a disconnect.
"To them, equipment failure is terrifying. To me, it’s 'Tuesday.' "
-----------
Before posting, please check the documentation, the FAQ, the Search function and FOR THE LOVE OF GLUB the Request Guidelines.

Wim Gielis
MVP
Posts: 2768
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:26 pm
OLAP Product: TM1, Jedox
Version: PAL 2.0.8
Excel Version: Microsoft 365
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Wim Gielis » Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:19 pm

Alan Kirk wrote:
Mon Jul 19, 2021 6:40 pm
Was the data source a cube view, or had it been in the past? Those always have the three extra "hidden" variables of (off the top of my head) sValue, nValue and Value_Is_String. The 577 variable count includes those when the process is created in the Editorsaurus, but if the source type were to be changed by hacking the file to something other than a view then it may cause a disconnect.
The data source type is marked as VIEW in the PRO file. At runtime, it can be change to a text file based on the logic in the process.
The process parameter number is 582 and the contents are VarType=32ColType=827 (25 times below each other) ==> 582,25 is the designation.

But there is also:
577,28
578,28
579,28
580,28
581,28

So the 28 does not match with the 25.

Can you relate to that, especially in the situation of a VIEW as the data source type ? Or do you have VIEW-based processes where you see something similar ?

By the way, in heading 577 we have:
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
V7
V8
V9
V10
V11
V12
V13
V14
V15
V16
V17
V18
V19
V20
V21
V22
V23
V24
Value
NVALUE
SVALUE
VALUE_IS_STRING
Best regards,

Wim Gielis

Excel Most Valuable Professional, 2011-2014
https://www.wimgielis.com ==> 117 TM1 articles and a lot of custom code
Newest blog article: Avoid circular references https://github.com/wimgielis

User avatar
Alan Kirk
Site Admin
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 2:30 am
OLAP Product: TM1
Version: PA2.0.6 Classic(PAW-free zone)
Excel Version: 2010 and Office 365
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Alan Kirk » Tue Jul 20, 2021 12:07 am

Wim Gielis wrote:
Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:19 pm

So the 28 does not match with the 25.

Can you relate to that, especially in the situation of a VIEW as the data source type ? Or do you have VIEW-based processes where you see something similar ?

By the way, in heading 577 we have:
V1
V2
V3
V4
V5
V6
V7
V8
V9
V10
V11
V12
V13
V14
V15
V16
V17
V18
V19
V20
V21
V22
V23
V24
Value
NVALUE
SVALUE
VALUE_IS_STRING
Buh?

But you have 28 variables there, not 25. As I said, NValue, SValue and Value_Is_String are all variables and are always counted as such in any process which is view based. They may not be visible in the GUI, they may be implicitly rather than explicitly defined but they are still variables and you can use them as such in the code. You'll see them in any .pro file that is created with a cube view as the data source. V1 to v24 makes 24, plus value makes 25, plus nvalue makes 26, plus svalue makes 27, plus value_is_string is 28. The only place they DON'T appear is in the 582 block which defines the variable type and column type, because it's unnecessary. That's why the 582 block shows the number of variables that are visible in the GUI which, for processes with a cube view data source, is always 3 less than the value in each of the other blocks.
Wim Gielis wrote:
Mon Jul 19, 2021 9:19 pm
But there is also:
577,28
578,28
579,28
580,28
581,28
Again, that's what I'd expect to see (and do see) in any processes which are View based, although 578 (which defines the data type) is the only one that has any relevant values; the third last one (nvalue) is always 1 for numeric, the second last one (svalue) is always 2 for string and the last one (value_is_string) is always 1 for numeric since the value there is either 1 (the value is a string) or 0 (it's a number).
"To them, equipment failure is terrifying. To me, it’s 'Tuesday.' "
-----------
Before posting, please check the documentation, the FAQ, the Search function and FOR THE LOVE OF GLUB the Request Guidelines.

lotsaram
MVP
Posts: 3510
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 11:14 am
OLAP Product: TableManager1
Version: PA 2.0.x
Excel Version: Office 365
Location: Switzerland

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by lotsaram » Tue Jul 20, 2021 8:26 am

Basically, what Alan said.
Please place all requests for help in a public thread. I will not answer PMs requesting assistance.

Wim Gielis
MVP
Posts: 2768
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:26 pm
OLAP Product: TM1, Jedox
Version: PAL 2.0.8
Excel Version: Microsoft 365
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Wim Gielis » Tue Jul 20, 2021 12:23 pm

I updated the case with IBM and I will await their reply.
Best regards,

Wim Gielis

Excel Most Valuable Professional, 2011-2014
https://www.wimgielis.com ==> 117 TM1 articles and a lot of custom code
Newest blog article: Avoid circular references https://github.com/wimgielis

Wim Gielis
MVP
Posts: 2768
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:26 pm
OLAP Product: TM1, Jedox
Version: PAL 2.0.8
Excel Version: Microsoft 365
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Wim Gielis » Tue Jul 20, 2021 4:55 pm

I cannot reproduce anymore the variable counts that I have in the corrupt PRO process, with a new process.
I still have the cube and view that is the data source of the process, and no matter what I do, I cannot get the same result.
So the conclusions should be:
- the previous process has become corrupt somehow (either by myself, or an external cause - I am pretty sure I wrote and used that process about a year ago in 2.0.8)
- there is less tolerance regarding these things, crashes or loss of code can occur.

The cube has 24 dimensions, this means 25 variables. Even though the 3 implicit variables are there (NValue, SValue, Value_Is_String), they are not listed under heading 582:

Code: Select all

582,25
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=33ColType=827
Headers 577 ==> 581 all list information on the 25+3 = 28 variables and have 28 lines each.
582 does not and has 25 lines. No idea why it was set up like that but there must be a reason :-)
Best regards,

Wim Gielis

Excel Most Valuable Professional, 2011-2014
https://www.wimgielis.com ==> 117 TM1 articles and a lot of custom code
Newest blog article: Avoid circular references https://github.com/wimgielis

User avatar
Alan Kirk
Site Admin
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 2:30 am
OLAP Product: TM1
Version: PA2.0.6 Classic(PAW-free zone)
Excel Version: 2010 and Office 365
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Alan Kirk » Wed Jul 21, 2021 1:02 am

Wim Gielis wrote:
Tue Jul 20, 2021 4:55 pm
I cannot reproduce anymore the variable counts that I have in the corrupt PRO process, with a new process.
I still have the cube and view that is the data source of the process, and no matter what I do, I cannot get the same result.
I had indeed wondered about the V1 to V24 names. A process with a cube view source will normally use the dimension names as the variable names unless they are (a) Invalid as a variable name by virtue of being a function name (like "dates") or (b) Invalid as a variable name because of spaces or the like.

For the names to be V1 to V24, either every dimension name is invalid for one of those reasons, or you changed them when you created or updated the process.
Wim Gielis wrote:
Tue Jul 20, 2021 4:55 pm
So the conclusions should be:
- the previous process has become corrupt somehow (either by myself, or an external cause - I am pretty sure I wrote and used that process about a year ago in 2.0.8)
- there is less tolerance regarding these things, crashes or loss of code can occur.

The cube has 24 dimensions, this means 25 variables. Even though the 3 implicit variables are there (NValue, SValue, Value_Is_String), they are not listed under heading 582:

Code: Select all

582,25
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=32ColType=827
VarType=33ColType=827
Headers 577 ==> 581 all list information on the 25+3 = 28 variables and have 28 lines each.
582 does not and has 25 lines. No idea why it was set up like that but there must be a reason :-)
I did mention that in my reply above:
I wrote:The only place they DON'T appear is in the 582 block which defines the variable type and column type, because it's unnecessary. That's why the 582 block shows the number of variables that are visible in the GUI which, for processes with a cube view data source, is always 3 less than the value in each of the other blocks.
The 582 block is specifically for use with the GUI. Since the three implicit variables never appear in the GUI (nor would you want them to since they shouldn't be changed by the user), it would be redundant to have those three in that block.

This is different to (for example) the 578 block which defines the type of data (numeric or string) and therefore needs to include the three hidden variables.
"To them, equipment failure is terrifying. To me, it’s 'Tuesday.' "
-----------
Before posting, please check the documentation, the FAQ, the Search function and FOR THE LOVE OF GLUB the Request Guidelines.

Bert
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 7:37 pm

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Bert » Wed Jul 21, 2021 1:40 am

Wim Gielis wrote:
Fri Jul 16, 2021 8:38 pm
Right. So you upgrade to 2.0.9.9 (over an existing 2.0.8 install) installing the server, Architect and Perspectives, TM1 Web and a bunch of other things that are not important for now. 2 small TM1 models are opening fine in Architect when their respective services are started and the data is loaded.

You start TM1 Perspectives from the Windows Start menu. Excel opens fine with some other addins (of mine, and Jedox, a.o.). No workbook is active/opened. You use TM1 > Explorer to log on in Perspectives. You open a view on a random cube and ask for an Active form to Excel. Nothing out of the ordinary I would say.

Bam ! Error !

14.png

Bam ! Another error !

15.png

To IBM: is it so freaking difficult to ask whether "ActiveWorkbook Is Nothing" ? Yes or No ? True or False ? Because if indeed 1 or more workbooks do exist prior to asking for an active form, it works fine. But the active form is created in a separate workbook, therefore an active workbook is actually not needed at the time of the active form. Anyways, seems to be never solved this one. 1 line of code :roll:
It looks like you also have Planning Analytics for Excel (PAX / PAfE) open. This will cause an issue. I just tried installing 2.0.9.9 and don't get the same issue, providing it's the only TM1 related add-in I have open.

User avatar
Alan Kirk
Site Admin
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 2:30 am
OLAP Product: TM1
Version: PA2.0.6 Classic(PAW-free zone)
Excel Version: 2010 and Office 365
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Alan Kirk » Wed Jul 21, 2021 2:33 am

Bert wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 1:40 am
Wim Gielis wrote:
Fri Jul 16, 2021 8:38 pm
No workbook is active/opened. You use TM1 > Explorer to log on in Perspectives. You open a view on a random cube and ask for an Active form to Excel. Nothing out of the ordinary I would say.

Bam ! Error !
It looks like you also have Planning Analytics for Excel (PAX / PAfE) open. This will cause an issue. I just tried installing 2.0.9.9 and don't get the same issue, providing it's the only TM1 related add-in I have open.
Are you sure that you tested this without a workbook open, which is the key issue that Wim identified? Because I can reproduce it in 2.0.9.9. And I know that I don't have PAfE open because Hell has yet to freeze over.
"To them, equipment failure is terrifying. To me, it’s 'Tuesday.' "
-----------
Before posting, please check the documentation, the FAQ, the Search function and FOR THE LOVE OF GLUB the Request Guidelines.

Bert
Posts: 9
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 7:37 pm

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Bert » Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:20 am

Alan Kirk wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 2:33 am
Bert wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 1:40 am
Wim Gielis wrote:
Fri Jul 16, 2021 8:38 pm
No workbook is active/opened. You use TM1 > Explorer to log on in Perspectives. You open a view on a random cube and ask for an Active form to Excel. Nothing out of the ordinary I would say.

Bam ! Error !
It looks like you also have Planning Analytics for Excel (PAX / PAfE) open. This will cause an issue. I just tried installing 2.0.9.9 and don't get the same issue, providing it's the only TM1 related add-in I have open.
Are you sure that you tested this without a workbook open, which is the key issue that Wim identified? Because I can reproduce it in 2.0.9.9. And I know that I don't have PAfE open because Hell has yet to freeze over.
Yes - I closed the workbook before creating the Active Form. I always get a blank workbook whichever way I open the TM1 add-in, but I closed it.

Wim Gielis
MVP
Posts: 2768
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:26 pm
OLAP Product: TM1, Jedox
Version: PAL 2.0.8
Excel Version: Microsoft 365
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Wim Gielis » Wed Jul 21, 2021 9:06 am

Alan Kirk wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 1:02 am
The 582 block is specifically for use with the GUI. Since the three implicit variables never appear in the GUI (nor would you want them to since they shouldn't be changed by the user), it would be redundant to have those three in that block.

This is different to (for example) the 578 block which defines the type of data (numeric or string) and therefore needs to include the three hidden variables.
Apologies Alan, I must have read your reply but drew the wrong conclusions. Those 3 variables indeed are useless for the GUI. Crashes only appear when in case of a malformed PRO file. Then again, it will not stop me from directly editing Notepad++ files every once in a while.

I am exploring Visual Studio Code and I like it. I can see me using that platform more. PAW is being adopted more, too, so that will mean less time spent in the TI editor as well.
Best regards,

Wim Gielis

Excel Most Valuable Professional, 2011-2014
https://www.wimgielis.com ==> 117 TM1 articles and a lot of custom code
Newest blog article: Avoid circular references https://github.com/wimgielis

User avatar
Alan Kirk
Site Admin
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 2:30 am
OLAP Product: TM1
Version: PA2.0.6 Classic(PAW-free zone)
Excel Version: 2010 and Office 365
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Alan Kirk » Wed Jul 21, 2021 9:39 am

Wim Gielis wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 9:06 am
I am exploring Visual Studio Code and I like it. I can see me using that platform more. PAW is being adopted more, too, so that will mean less time spent in the TI editor as well.
As you know I long since left the Editorsaurus behind for Arc. As you also know I want nothing to do with PAW since I consider the entire thing to be an ill designed, unreliable, convoluted clusterfrack. At this point the amount of faith that I have in IBM to do a decent, reliable front end with the functionality that users need could fit into a teaspoon with room to spare.

But VS Code, on the other hand, I agree is very nice indeed. Some parts of Microsoft can still do things right. I didn't understand the point of it at first; why use VS Code when Visual Studio is free? Within a short space of time I got it. I find it to be a very nice, lightweight and functional multi-purpose code editor, including for things like markup language documents. If you plan to work with Python the official Microsoft Python extension including Pylance is rather nice to have too.
"To them, equipment failure is terrifying. To me, it’s 'Tuesday.' "
-----------
Before posting, please check the documentation, the FAQ, the Search function and FOR THE LOVE OF GLUB the Request Guidelines.

Wim Gielis
MVP
Posts: 2768
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:26 pm
OLAP Product: TM1, Jedox
Version: PAL 2.0.8
Excel Version: Microsoft 365
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Wim Gielis » Wed Jul 21, 2021 10:13 am

Bert wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 1:40 am
It looks like you also have Planning Analytics for Excel (PAX / PAfE) open. This will cause an issue. I just tried installing 2.0.9.9 and don't get the same issue, providing it's the only TM1 related add-in I have open.
Hi Bert,

At the time of the screenshot, I did. Afterwards, I turned off anything that could be related to addins and the issue persists.
Best regards,

Wim Gielis

Excel Most Valuable Professional, 2011-2014
https://www.wimgielis.com ==> 117 TM1 articles and a lot of custom code
Newest blog article: Avoid circular references https://github.com/wimgielis

Wim Gielis
MVP
Posts: 2768
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:26 pm
OLAP Product: TM1, Jedox
Version: PAL 2.0.8
Excel Version: Microsoft 365
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Wim Gielis » Wed Jul 21, 2021 10:15 am

Alan Kirk wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 2:33 am
Bert wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 1:40 am
It looks like you also have Planning Analytics for Excel (PAX / PAfE) open. This will cause an issue. I just tried installing 2.0.9.9 and don't get the same issue, providing it's the only TM1 related add-in I have open.
Are you sure that you tested this without a workbook open, which is the key issue that Wim identified? Because I can reproduce it in 2.0.9.9. And I know that I don't have PAfE open because Hell has yet to freeze over.
Interesting Alan that you can reproduce it since the IBM engineer was not able to reproduce.
Best regards,

Wim Gielis

Excel Most Valuable Professional, 2011-2014
https://www.wimgielis.com ==> 117 TM1 articles and a lot of custom code
Newest blog article: Avoid circular references https://github.com/wimgielis

Wim Gielis
MVP
Posts: 2768
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:26 pm
OLAP Product: TM1, Jedox
Version: PAL 2.0.8
Excel Version: Microsoft 365
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Wim Gielis » Thu Jul 22, 2021 10:59 am

Wim Gielis wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 10:15 am
Interesting Alan that you can reproduce it since the IBM engineer was not able to reproduce.
Problem seems to be linked to the mere presence of a Personal.xlsb macro folder.
Even if completely empty, the fact that the file exists (for me: "C:\Users\WGielis\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Excel\XLSTART\PERSONAL.XLSB") leads to the issue.

Alan: could you possibly confirm this by moving that file out of XLSTART - should it exist ? Thanks.
Best regards,

Wim Gielis

Excel Most Valuable Professional, 2011-2014
https://www.wimgielis.com ==> 117 TM1 articles and a lot of custom code
Newest blog article: Avoid circular references https://github.com/wimgielis

Wim Gielis
MVP
Posts: 2768
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:26 pm
OLAP Product: TM1, Jedox
Version: PAL 2.0.8
Excel Version: Microsoft 365
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Wim Gielis » Fri Jul 23, 2021 9:24 am

Wim Gielis wrote:
Thu Jul 22, 2021 10:59 am
Wim Gielis wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 10:15 am
Interesting Alan that you can reproduce it since the IBM engineer was not able to reproduce.
Problem seems to be linked to the mere presence of a Personal.xlsb macro folder.
Even if completely empty, the fact that the file exists (for me: "C:\Users\WGielis\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Excel\XLSTART\PERSONAL.XLSB") leads to the issue.

Alan: could you possibly confirm this by moving that file out of XLSTART - should it exist ? Thanks.
It's confirmed by the IBM engineer: once you have a Personal.xlsb in place (even completely empty) and no active workbook,
then logging on to Perspectives does not create a new empty workbook. Hence, active forms will also result in the 2 errors shown.

I guess the programming in the Perspectives addin was like it would count the number of workbooks.
Personal.xlsb would count as a workbook, so no new workbook is created. Pretty bad logic if you ask me.
The engineer and me have very little hope it will get fixed, though.
Best regards,

Wim Gielis

Excel Most Valuable Professional, 2011-2014
https://www.wimgielis.com ==> 117 TM1 articles and a lot of custom code
Newest blog article: Avoid circular references https://github.com/wimgielis

Adam
Posts: 62
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2019 12:10 am
OLAP Product: IBM PA
Version: 2.0.9.7
Excel Version: Office 365 x32

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Adam » Fri Jul 23, 2021 2:00 pm

Wim Gielis wrote:
Fri Jul 23, 2021 9:24 am
It's confirmed by the IBM engineer: once you have a Personal.xlsb in place (even completely empty) and no active workbook,
then logging on to Perspectives does not create a new empty workbook. Hence, active forms will also result in the 2 errors shown.

I guess the programming in the Perspectives addin was like it would count the number of workbooks.
Personal.xlsb would count as a workbook, so no new workbook is created. Pretty bad logic if you ask me.
The engineer and me have very little hope it will get fixed, though.
I've been following this thread and it piqued my interest ... If there's no active development for Perspectives, then how does a new version of PA introduce something like this, i.e. if it was not an issue before, why is it an issue now?
Take care.
Adam

Wim Gielis
MVP
Posts: 2768
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 6:26 pm
OLAP Product: TM1, Jedox
Version: PAL 2.0.8
Excel Version: Microsoft 365
Location: Brussels, Belgium
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Wim Gielis » Fri Jul 23, 2021 2:04 pm

Adam wrote:
Fri Jul 23, 2021 2:00 pm
Wim Gielis wrote:
Fri Jul 23, 2021 9:24 am
It's confirmed by the IBM engineer: once you have a Personal.xlsb in place (even completely empty) and no active workbook,
then logging on to Perspectives does not create a new empty workbook. Hence, active forms will also result in the 2 errors shown.

I guess the programming in the Perspectives addin was like it would count the number of workbooks.
Personal.xlsb would count as a workbook, so no new workbook is created. Pretty bad logic if you ask me.
The engineer and me have very little hope it will get fixed, though.
I've been following this thread and it piqued my interest ... If there's no active development for Perspectives, then how does a new version of PA introduce something like this, i.e. if it was not an issue before, why is it an issue now?
It’s most probably been an issue for ages. I always cursed when I had this. I expect it to have been there forever. Still no reason why IBM should not have tackled this one years ago. I cannot imagine I am the only one out there with a Personal.xlsb and starting perspectives from a blank canvas.
Best regards,

Wim Gielis

Excel Most Valuable Professional, 2011-2014
https://www.wimgielis.com ==> 117 TM1 articles and a lot of custom code
Newest blog article: Avoid circular references https://github.com/wimgielis

User avatar
scrumthing
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:18 pm
OLAP Product: TM1
Version: 11.x
Excel Version: MS365

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by scrumthing » Mon Jul 26, 2021 6:28 am

Wim Gielis wrote:
Fri Jul 23, 2021 2:04 pm
It’s most probably been an issue for ages. I always cursed when I had this. I expect it to have been there forever. Still no reason why IBM should not have tackled this one years ago. I cannot imagine I am the only one out there with a Personal.xlsb and starting perspectives from a blank canvas.
You are not alone but most of us have accepted the shortcomings of Perspectives. I for example have just given up. Currently I am putting my hopes in Third Party tools like ApliqoUX, XLCubed, etc.

IBM should just make Perspectives Open Source so we as a community could fix the addin. Especially because they have completely ditched the c-api internally and next version will be rest only. That way the people who are still using tm1 v 11.x can have a working excel addin.
There is no OLAP database besides TM1!

User avatar
Alan Kirk
Site Admin
Posts: 6449
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 2:30 am
OLAP Product: TM1
Version: PA2.0.6 Classic(PAW-free zone)
Excel Version: 2010 and Office 365
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Planning Analytics 2.0.9.9

Post by Alan Kirk » Mon Jul 26, 2021 10:42 pm

Wim Gielis wrote:
Thu Jul 22, 2021 10:59 am
Wim Gielis wrote:
Wed Jul 21, 2021 10:15 am
Interesting Alan that you can reproduce it since the IBM engineer was not able to reproduce.
Problem seems to be linked to the mere presence of a Personal.xlsb macro folder.
Even if completely empty, the fact that the file exists (for me: "C:\Users\WGielis\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Excel\XLSTART\PERSONAL.XLSB") leads to the issue.

Alan: could you possibly confirm this by moving that file out of XLSTART - should it exist ? Thanks.
Sorry, I missed this one at the time, though it's clearly been overtaken by events anyway. I can confirm that I do indeed have a Personal macro workbook because... what power Excel user doesn't? I have to admit that the thought of that triggering the issue didn't even cross my mind but should have when someone else in this thread said they couldn't reproduce it, which should have triggered the question "So what could be different?"
scrumthing wrote:
Mon Jul 26, 2021 6:28 am
Wim Gielis wrote:
Fri Jul 23, 2021 2:04 pm
It’s most probably been an issue for ages. I always cursed when I had this. I expect it to have been there forever. Still no reason why IBM should not have tackled this one years ago. I cannot imagine I am the only one out there with a Personal.xlsb and starting perspectives from a blank canvas.
You are not alone but most of us have accepted the shortcomings of Perspectives. I for example have just given up. Currently I am putting my hopes in Third Party tools like ApliqoUX, XLCubed, etc.
Myself as well, though my faith in TM1 as a product is wavering to a greater extent than ever before. Actually that's not right, TM1 I still have faith in. Planning Analytics, and the way IBM is managing it and pricing it, on the other hand...

There's a post up in General at the moment asking for advice on alternatives to TM1. The second post in the thread asks "why?" I'm curious about that too so I haven't said anything there, but for mine you can start with the price and work backwards from there, including the failure to provide an adequate PAW solution for Windows users (a couple of flavours of Windows Server 2016 or requiring a Linux server is NOT an adequate solution), the failure to address customer needs for years (hierarchy aware DBRWs), lack of understanding of the need for stability in commercial environments (short cadence releases) and the list goes on and on and effing on.

If I could have one thing from IBM it would be decoupling PAfE from that... thing... PAW.

On the price issue, a few years back one of my colleagues left to work for another company. He wanted to bring TM1 into his new company. I hooked him up with our then sales rep. He called me back a few days later. "They want as much as we're spending on our whole GL system!!! We can't afford that!!!" IBM may have missed the memo but an ever decreasing number of companies can these days. I swear IBM still has its head jammed in the year 1965 when it comes to things like this.

Oh, and then there is the licencing "model".
scrumthing wrote:
Mon Jul 26, 2021 6:28 am
IBM should just make Perspectives Open Source so we as a community could fix the addin. Especially because they have completely ditched the c-api internally and next version will be rest only. That way the people who are still using tm1 v 11.x can have a working excel addin.
It's going to be interesting to see what the uptake is on V12 given that it will be the end of Perspectives and any home brewed, classic API based extensions and given the many, many shortcomings of PAW and PAfe. V12 may be shoved down the throat of IBM Cloud users but I have doubts about the uptake in Local launching like a Saturn V.
"To them, equipment failure is terrifying. To me, it’s 'Tuesday.' "
-----------
Before posting, please check the documentation, the FAQ, the Search function and FOR THE LOVE OF GLUB the Request Guidelines.

Post Reply