TM1 Forum

Hi,

I have to pull data from one cube to another. There the Quarter dimension is not matching and based on the business requirement we kept like this but now end up with issue writing rules.


Source Dimension:
- FY13 (Consolidation)
- FY13-Q1
- FY13-Q2
- FY13-Q3
- FY13-Q4

Target Dimension:
- 2013 (consolidation)
- 2013-Q1
- 2013-Q2
- 2013-Q3
- 2013-Q4

Rules :

[Target Cube, Target Element] = [Source Cube, Source Element];

I want to convert this source format FY13-Q1to 2013-Q1 as in the target cube.

Any help. Thanks in advance.
KKMK

kkmk wrote:Hi,

I have to pull data from one cube to another. There the Quarter dimension is not matching and based on the business requirement we kept like this but now end up with issue writing rules.


Source Dimension:
- FY13 (Consolidation)
- FY13-Q1
- FY13-Q2
- FY13-Q3
- FY13-Q4

Target Dimension:
- 2013 (consolidation)
- 2013-Q1
- 2013-Q2
- 2013-Q3
- 2013-Q4

Rules :

[Target Cube, Target Element] = [Source Cube, Source Element];

I want to convert this source format FY13-Q1to 2013-Q1 as in the target cube.

Any help. Thanks in advance.
KKMK

Hi,

Maybe you can create an attribut for the target dimension containing the name of the source element. This solution provide more flexibility and is probably more reliable than replacing the characters to generate the source element name. (i don't even know if it is possibe in a cube rule... )
Hope it's helpful.
Omar

I'd combine the two - create the attribute, then write a rule in the attribute cube to do the manipulation.
Don't forget you will need a feeder and a 'reverse' attribute for that.
And put an n: in your rule...

David Usherwood wrote:I'd combine the two - create the attribute, then write a rule in the attribute cube to do the manipulation.
Don't forget you will need a feeder and a 'reverse' attribute for that.
And put an n: in your rule...

Hi,
How do you replace characters in Cube Rules? And supposing it is possible, it may have impact on performance.
Anyways I would recommand using a process to fill this attribute.

Using a "reverse attribute" is a really efficient (if it's not just necessary) and easy to implement since we have in this particular case a One-to-One relationship between source and target elements.

Cheers,

Omar

If there is truly a one-to-one relationship you could just create an alias on the source and/or target dimensions and not worry about doing an ATTRS lookup in the rules.

tomok wrote:If there is truly a one-to-one relationship you could just create an alias on the source and/or target dimensions and not worry about doing an ATTRS lookup in the rules.

I agree! The solution i proposed was for a more general situation. But I completly agree with you...