Reporting Cube & Data Entry Cube

Post Reply
appleglaze28
Regular Participant
Posts: 269
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2009 3:43 am
OLAP Product: Cognos TM1, Planning
Version: 9.1 SP3 9.4 MR1 FP1 9.5
Excel Version: 2003

Reporting Cube & Data Entry Cube

Post by appleglaze28 »

I'd like to ask you guys if there is any best practice advise you can give on whether to create report on the data entry cube or creating a cube for reporting. What are the things to consider when it comes to creating the design. Cause for example if the data entry fields are exactly the same, would it be necessary to create a duplicate cube to transfer the data to it and report from that cube? Especially when it comes to performance. Any pros & cons?
Alan Kirk
Site Admin
Posts: 6667
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 2:30 am
OLAP Product: TM1
Version: PA2.0.9.18 Classic NO PAW!
Excel Version: 2013 and Office 365
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Reporting Cube & Data Entry Cube

Post by Alan Kirk »

appleglaze28 wrote:I'd like to ask you guys if there is any best practice advise you can give on whether to create report on the data entry cube or creating a cube for reporting. What are the things to consider when it comes to creating the design. Cause for example if the data entry fields are exactly the same, would it be necessary to create a duplicate cube to transfer the data to it and report from that cube? Especially when it comes to performance. Any pros & cons?
I can't quite fathom any reason, aside from an urgent and insatiable desire to add layer upon layer of redundant complexity, for having an input cube and a reporting cube. Certainly not ones which are duplicates of each other. The whole reason for TM1 having write-back capability is to allow input to and output from the same place. Want to freeze the input at a certain point? Use security. It makes more sense than carrying the data twice, interlinked by unnecessary interfaces and/or rules and/or replications.
"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: 3706
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2009 11:14 am
OLAP Product: TableManager1
Version: PA 2.0.x
Excel Version: Office 365
Location: Switzerland

Re: Reporting Cube & Data Entry Cube

Post by lotsaram »

Alan Kirk wrote:I can't quite fathom any reason, aside from an urgent and insatiable desire to add layer upon layer of redundant complexity, for having an input cube and a reporting cube. Certainly not ones which are duplicates of each other. The whole reason for TM1 having write-back capability is to allow input to and output from the same place. Want to freeze the input at a certain point? Use security. It makes more sense than carrying the data twice, interlinked by unnecessary interfaces and/or rules and/or replications.
I can. Caching and performance.

If you have large cubes and/or lots of rule calculations then quite possibly some high level views might take quite-a-while to open. If the views are pre-constructed then you can get much better performance for users. Any change to cube data blows away the calculation cache and view cache for the cube (which also blows away the benefit of pre-calculating and caching.) So having separate data entry and reporting cubes is conceivable. In most instances its not warranted, but in some it is.
Alan Kirk
Site Admin
Posts: 6667
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 2:30 am
OLAP Product: TM1
Version: PA2.0.9.18 Classic NO PAW!
Excel Version: 2013 and Office 365
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Reporting Cube & Data Entry Cube

Post by Alan Kirk »

lotsaram wrote:
Alan Kirk wrote:I can't quite fathom any reason, aside from an urgent and insatiable desire to add layer upon layer of redundant complexity, for having an input cube and a reporting cube. Certainly not ones which are duplicates of each other. The whole reason for TM1 having write-back capability is to allow input to and output from the same place. Want to freeze the input at a certain point? Use security. It makes more sense than carrying the data twice, interlinked by unnecessary interfaces and/or rules and/or replications.
I can. Caching and performance.

If you have large cubes and/or lots of rule calculations then quite possibly some high level views might take quite-a-while to open. If the views are pre-constructed then you can get much better performance for users. Any change to cube data blows away the calculation cache and view cache for the cube (which also blows away the benefit of pre-calculating and caching.) So having separate data entry and reporting cubes is conceivable. In most instances its not warranted, but in some it is.
Fair point. Though as you indicate in the last paragraph, it's more likely to be an exception rather than a rule. There's no point doing it just for the sake of doing it, or to try to "compartmentalise" data into input and output sets. Unless you have some really serious performance issues that the caching can overcome (in which case the first thing to do is make sure that the rules are optimised) then splitting them increases maintenance issues, and also loses you "real time" performance resulting in users possibly seeing out of date data.
"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