Mapping Cube

[mukeshrajdass]

Hi

I am creating a reporting mapping cube which is different from the internal management financial reporting...will try to describe it in simple terms

[Management Report Cube]
Dimension Example (over 3 dimension - Account/Cost Centre/Product) - Multiple parent-child

Parent 1(Type C)
- Child 1 (Type N)
- Child 2 (Type N)
- Child 3 (Type N)

[Mapping Cube]<------------Updated by rule from Management Report Cube (above)
Dimension Example Flat hierarchy..only one parent

Total
- Line Item 1
- Parent 1(Type C) 1
- Child 1 (Type N)
- Child 2 (Type N) -1
- Child 3 (Type N)

So Line Item 1 is reported to be the total of Parent 1 less Child 2 in VALES (numeric measurement) based on FACTORS (string measurement ie -1 or 1 so that type C can have values)

Because the client has a 100 specialized reports each with various combination of dimension mapping in various uncontrollable Excel files ...a separate centrally controlled mapping cube is created to prevent muddling up the normal management reporting cube. Subsets was ruled out....mapping from the original Reporting cube was also ruled out..

PROBLEM
1. VALUES and FACTORS appear correctly in the mapping cube. VALUES is visible if 'Zero suppression on Column' is not enabled. If Full Zero suppression is applied ...only String FACTOR is displayed (VALUES does not appear even if it has correct numerical values)..STRANGE ??

2. Mapping Cube Dimension consolidated item 'Total' has no values !! (Is it because the child values are rule derived ??) Tried putting a rule shown below to get the values but does not work. I might be using the rule incorrectly....
Example -
Rule:-
['Total'] = ConsolidateChildren['Total'];

It might be a case of not seeing an Elephant standing next to me....any bright spark ???

Thanks

[tomok]

And you wrote feeders for these rules, understanding that unfed calculated cells do not consolidate AND disappear when zero suppressed?

[mattgoff]

I agree with tomok, this is a feeder problem. Also, please read the Request for Assistance Guidelines, particularly #5. Abstracted questions are difficult to answer (but in this case the root cause is obvious). I know you think you're making it "simpler" but you're not-- you're obfuscating things which makes diagnosis harder.

Matt

P.S. Anyone charging someone else for their TM1 "expertise" should absolutely know what the symptoms of bad/missing feeders look like. That's TM1 101 stuff.

[mukeshrajdass]

Apologies.. the feeders are there which i did not put in the example above...The values are correct and not indicated as 'unfed' etc...

Will try to figure out the problem...Thanks for your feedback.

[mattgoff]

Apologies.. the feeders are there which i did not put in the example above...The values are correct and not indicated as 'unfed' etc...

Are you using persistent feeders? If so, shut down, delete the .feeder files, and restart. Also, make sure that if you're using conditional feeders that MaximumCubeLoadThreads=1.

[mukeshrajdass]

Hi

Thanks for the feedback..do not use PersistentFeeders (not needed..Test environment)...Had tried what you suggested...going to try process of elimination on feeders to try to figure out which or what is causing it. With TM1...when you think you know everything...something or somewhat will always challenge that or surprise you..

Appreciate your help...

Thx

[tomok]

If you would have posted some actual code instead of that hypothetical garbage someone might have actually been able to help you.

[mukeshrajdass]

Appreciate the desire to assist BUT NOT the language or etiquette...thanks

[Alan Kirk]

Appreciate the desire to assist BUT NOT the language or etiquette...thanks

That is a fair statement, especially as Matt had already made the point in the preceding post clearly and civilly much further up the thread.

But since you do bring up etiquette... you've been on the forum for 5 years now. The Request For Assistance guidelines shouldn't be unfamiliar to you, nor (given that the issue of "abstract questions" has been raised many times) should the fact that clause 5 was specifically inserted to deal with them.

You should also be familiar with the fact that the RFA Guidelines weren't introduced because anybody likes rules and regimentation. Rather, they were introduced in recognition of the fact that those who answer questions do so out of their own time, the most precious commodity they have. And the RFA Guidelines are there primarily to make sure that that time is not wasted on wild goose chases. The reasons that abstract questions are frowned upon are clearly set out, and this also applies to incomplete questions like those which (as but one example) ask a rules question but omit to even state that feeders exist, much less what they are.

In summary, wasting the time of other members with incomplete questions (and I am speaking generally here, not specifically about this thread) is not good etiquette either, so I trust you can understand that it may, at times, cause some frustration which may occasionally bubble over. However we do generally ask that the bubbling be kept to a minimum, since unless it's directed at someone who is something of a serial offender (and again I am speaking generally, not about you) in the longer term it probably doesn't do the "vibe" of the forum a lot of good.

Perhaps it would be best to draw a line under it at this point.