Issue with Persistent Feeders. (PA Version 2.0.9.4)

Post Reply
ardi
Community Contributor
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:41 pm
OLAP Product: tm1, cognos bi
Version: from TM1 9.4 to PA 2.0.9.6
Excel Version: 2010
Location: Toronto, ON

Issue with Persistent Feeders. (PA Version 2.0.9.4)

Post by ardi »

Hi guys,

We are experiencing issues with Feeders, which I cannot explain. We have a reporting cube that simply consolidates data from a couple of Input Cubes, and the Rule on Reporting Cube is very Simple:

['Amount'] = N: DB ( 'Input_Cube', !rpt_dim1, !rpt_dim2, !rpt_dim3, !rpt_dim4, !rpt_dim5, !rpt_dim6 , 'Amount' ) ;


We have a FEEDER statement on the Input Cube:

['Amount'] => DB ( 'rpt_Cube', !input_dim1, !input_dim2, !input_dim3, !input_dim4, !input_dim5, !input_dim6 , 'Amount' ) ;

Both Cubes have the same number of dimensions, but the names of dimensions are different ( also the size and the Hierarches are different), but every Leaf Element of dimensions of Input_Cube exists in the respective dimension of rpt_Cube

We use Persistent Feeders, and what is strange is that the If i go to the Input_Cube and Trace Feeders from the Leaf Level Cell, it does show that the Respective Target Cell on the rpt_Cube is fed

Also if I go the rpt_Cube and I click on "Check Feeders", it does show that the value is Calculated

But the cell gets suppressed when zero suppression is ON and also it it does not show on the Consolidations

Anyone has ever experienced this?

Thank you
Ardian Alikaj
burnstripe
Regular Participant
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed May 06, 2020 2:58 pm
OLAP Product: Planning Analytics
Version: 2.0.9
Excel Version: 2016

Re: Issue with Persistent Feeders. (PA Version 2.0.9.4)

Post by burnstripe »

Two thoughts I have are

1) is there another rule overriding the consolidated values to show zero

2) more likely, in the reporting cube, for each dimension are the elements weighted correctly? An element can have a 0 weighting to another consolidated element. When this weighting is 0, the element is still a child of the parent but no values will be rolled up. I would start by creating a view with just level zero elements and then try select a consolidation at a time from each dimension to hone in on the potential problem weighting
burnstripe
Regular Participant
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed May 06, 2020 2:58 pm
OLAP Product: Planning Analytics
Version: 2.0.9
Excel Version: 2016

Re: Issue with Persistent Feeders. (PA Version 2.0.9.4)

Post by burnstripe »

"But the cell gets suppressed when zero suppression is ON and also it it does not show on the Consolidations"

Sorry missed this comment. If the leaves are suppressing with zero suppression then there is a feeder issue. I have seen it lie on the check feeders. Most likely because it once was fed but is no more.

If the leaves aren't suppressed but consolidations are 0 then refer to my previous comment
ardi
Community Contributor
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 1:41 pm
OLAP Product: tm1, cognos bi
Version: from TM1 9.4 to PA 2.0.9.6
Excel Version: 2010
Location: Toronto, ON

Re: Issue with Persistent Feeders. (PA Version 2.0.9.4)

Post by ardi »

burnstripe wrote: Thu Apr 15, 2021 11:19 pm "But the cell gets suppressed when zero suppression is ON and also it it does not show on the Consolidations"

Sorry missed this comment. If the leaves are suppressing with zero suppression then there is a feeder issue. I have seen it lie on the check feeders. Most likely because it once was fed but is no more.

If the leaves aren't suppressed but consolidations are 0 then refer to my previous comment
Thank you for your reply. Yes, the Zero Suppression suppresses the data from the View, which is an indication of Under Feeding, but the strange thing is that the FEEDER Statement is straight forward (No Conditional Feeders or anything like that) and even deleting .FEEDERS files and restarting the server does not resolve the issue. This looks like a TM1 bug and IBM is looking into it also
Ardian Alikaj
User avatar
PavoGa
MVP
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Apr 18, 2013 6:59 pm
OLAP Product: TM1
Version: 10.2.2 FP7, PA2.0.9.1
Excel Version: 2013 PAW
Location: Charleston, Tennessee

Re: Issue with Persistent Feeders. (PA Version 2.0.9.4)

Post by PavoGa »

I know you said the feeder is straightforward, but just to confirm, it does not have one of the elements using an attribute call to address a target cell does it? Second, if you process feeders on the input cube, nothing changes?

A friend of mine had a problem with this yesterday with the difference that he had a rule on a consolidation that used a component consolidation and component leaf to calculate the value. If either of the components (c or n) were included, the consolidation would not zero suppress out. However, if just the top consolidation was selected in the view, it did. Using his example, I was unable to duplicate the problem.

He did resolve it by adding another leaf element to the top consolidation, weighting it to zero and feeding it from, of all things, the other leaf element component. Have not been able to explain that one.
Ty
Cleveland, TN
burnstripe
Regular Participant
Posts: 197
Joined: Wed May 06, 2020 2:58 pm
OLAP Product: Planning Analytics
Version: 2.0.9
Excel Version: 2016

Re: Issue with Persistent Feeders. (PA Version 2.0.9.4)

Post by burnstripe »

Do you have a dev server? If so have you also try deleting the .blb file for the cube along with the .feeders file.
I've encountered something similar before back in Nov/Dec on 2.0.9 and it turned out it wasn't fed. N levels still acted like they were suppressed until I removed both the .feeders and .blb file, when both files were removed consolidations and leaf elements then showed same behaviours as each other.

You can repeat the behaviour, create a calc, test that it suppresses, create a valid feeder check it doesn't suppress, delete that feeder, it's no longer fed but the calc still doesn't suppress. If nothing changed on the dimensions hierarchies then consolidated and leaf values will display, but if the structure is changed/rebuilt then only the leaves doesn't suppress, the consolidations do suppress.
Post Reply