Columns in the dimension fact table

Similar Questions

• sum of a column of the dimension

  Hello
  If my requirement of report said we get SUM (Treasury of column) of the dimension table then can we do it? I have undersatnd that function must be used for measures in fact table. What are we doing to reach the sum of the columns in the dimension table? The report tries to compare the sum (column done) sum (dimension columns). Earlier when I used the sum on the column dimension function he gave no precise results. Please advice.

  Unfortunately, I could not explain this matter in a simple unique way, without seeing exactly the report and generated queries

  In the simple table, OBIEE is supposed to do something like this (I assume you put the attribute of the year, money and a measure of 'real')

  "+ select +".
  + Year +.
  + Sum (cash) +.
  + Sum (fact measure) +.

  + Of +.
  + time_dim_table, +.
  + cash_dim_table, +.
  + fact_table +.

  + where (joins).
  + Group by year +.
  "

  You can check if the physical demand looks like this, in order to understand the results.

  In the PivotTable, it's totally different.
  Your physical demand will be no aggregation: so what will:

  "+ select +".
  + Year +.
  + Cash +.
  + Sum (fact measure) +.

  + Of +.
  + time_dim_table, +.
  + cash_dim_table, +.
  + fact_table +.

  + where (joins).
  + Group by year, money +.
  "

  But, OBIEE then apply logic calculatiosn to display goods results in the PivotTable.
  Who can explain the different results.

  But don't forget that told you right: avoid the aggregation on the dimension attributes. You can sometimes has good results (ex: using the pivot, or other), but it's not really the best way to make your reports. If you often need a "sum (cash"), create a new table of logic made with the 'picture of cash' (even if it is also a dimension table).

• Combine data sources with different granularity in the same fact table?

  I have two operating tables 'Incident (157 columns)' and 'unit (70 Colums) '. For all the "incidents" happening there could be one or more records in the table of the 'unit '.
  
  As part of my design of data mart, I have merged the tables in one "makes the incident (227 columns)" and insert records from two tables with a join condition between them [incident. IN_NUM = Unit.IN_NUM].
  
  Is this correct, is my question? or am I mix data sources with different granularity in the same fact table. Appreciate your help.
  
  Best regards
  Bees

  Bees,
  Are the measures of the 'Incident', repeated during an incident given, in more than one record in the table of the unit? If so, then the sum (indicent.measure) will give an incorrect result?

  What is there to merge physically tables set outside OBIEE? With OBIEE you might have a table of 'facts' logic to present the user with report, which from tables separated units and Incidents and would stop the occurrence of incorrect aggregations. A common piece of modeling in the same way would be arrested in OBIEE headers and lines of command, quite common to have a logical fact 'orders' which contained the two header orders and order line, this translates into the Incidents-> relationship of units.

  To do what I mentioned, is relatively simple, you need a "Dim - Incident" at two levels, unit, mapp and Incident unique identifiers as keys to level and then use these levels to define the content of the levels correctly in your 2 tables logic sources logic "done", IE the LTS Incidents at incident level LTS units as level of units.

  Hope this helps, let us know if you get stuck.
  See you soon
  Alastair

• Made with multi date columns to the dimension of time

  Hello world

  First let see my script:

  I have the control panel with these columns

  order_no (int),

  create_date (date),

  approve_date (date)

  close_Date (date)

  ----

  I have a time hierarchy dimension: time

  I want to see at the time of the hierarchy, how many orders created, approved and closed for each time part(year,quarter,month,..) as below:

  Date | created | approved | closed

  ————————————————------------------------

  2007-1st quarter | 50. 40         | 30

  2007 - q2 | 60. 20         | 10

  Q3-2007 | 10. 14         | 11

  2007-4th quarter | 67. 28         | 22

  Q1-2008 | 20. 13         | 8

  Q2-2008 | 55. 25         | 20

  Q3-2008 | 75. 35         | 20

  Q4-2008 | 90. 20         | 2

  …

  My solution:

  Physical layer;

  1. I create an order f alias as the fact table for the roll of the order

  2 i joined f-ordered with d-time (time alias) on f_order.created_Date = d - time.day_id

  3 - I added 2 logical column with the formula of the measures:

  Sum aggregation is_approved(If approve_date= THEN 0 else 1)

  Sum aggregation is_closed(If closed_date= THEN 0 else 1)

  order_no (will use to measure aggregation created County

  When I create the report in analytics in the generated query he used created_date and this isn't what I expected!

  What is the best solution?

  1-

  If I have to create 3 is of the order: f_order_created, f_order_approved, f_order_closed and join each other on these columns d-time?

  f_order_created.created_Date = d - time.day_id

  f_order_approved.approved_Date = d - time.day_id

  f_order_closed.closed_Date = d - time.day_id

  2-do you create my fine measure?

  Hello anonymous user,.

  The approach with three done alias that you then use in three separate sources of logical table for your logical fact is the right one. This way, you keep canonical once and did do the role play.

  So you won't need to 3 facts in the layer of logic that you ask above, but only 3 LTS. Physically, you need 3 alias joined the dimension of time with the join specifications you mention of course.

  PS: Jeff wrote about this a few years if you want to take a look.

• Comparison of column in the form of table II

  Hello
  
  At the APEX 4.1 I am doing something similar to this thread: in table form: compare two fields in column where I need to do a validation on two columns in tabular form. It works for both columns are columns of text box, but I can't make it work when comparing to a single column to display. For validation, I have defined it as an "Expression of PL/SQL" and my expression is: CURRENT_VALUE >: PREV_VALUE where CURRENT_VALUE is a column of text box that accepts user input and PREV_VALUE is only one display column.
  
  Regardless of the absorbed power, the row is updated without any errors raised; He seems to treat the single display value in the vacuum and made the comparison with an empty value. The only solution I could find was to make the comparison in a update trigger on and will raise an error if validation fails; but the result is not as nice as the built in features of validation of the APEX.
  
  No indication on how to make it work using the validation of the APEX is greatly appreciated.
  
  Thank you!

  Only column display are for display only and are not saved in the session when you send, so that you can't access with pl/sql.

  So either do the validation in javascript/jQuery or, and it is best if you ask me, make a text field and set to read-only.

• Two filters in two dimensions without constraining the fact table

  Hi all
  
  does anyone know how to avoid the factual constraint when you create a report with two filters on different dimensions?
  
  I have a fact table big with more than 10 million lines. In the starmodel is the customer of the dimension and the products. I create a filter on the customer atrribute 'Status' and set to 'active '. Now I add the "Product Type" column of the dimension 'Product' in the filter section. When I want to choose a value OBIEE executes a select statement in the fact table. So I have to wait very long to select a value. Is it possible to say OBIEE only to select the dimension table without joining the fact table?
  
  Thank you much in advance.
  
  Kind regards
  Stefan

  Use is implied.

  Create a table of facts of the DUMMY and make also implied made for this dimension column. It will solve the problem.
  http://obiee11gqna.blogspot.com/2011/01/implicit-fact-column-in-OBIEE.html

  Published by: MK on January 17, 2012 07:08

  Published by: MK on January 17, 2012 07:08

• Dimension table is associated with N number of fact tables

  Salvation by the Expert,
  
  In the case of a fact table star schema is associated with the N dimension tables, it is possible to join a table of size N with the number of tables of facts... Please let my know your suggestion...
  
  
  Thank you to
  
  Harish

  Hello

  Yes, it's quite possible. A dimension can join the many fact table. For ex: temporal dimension and w_employee_d are classic examples of this behavior.

  Kind regards
  Sandeep

• Where is the dimensions column in the finder?

  I wanted to be able to sort a folder full of images on my network by dimensions.

  I'm not able to find the column for the dimensions in the list view.

  Can someone help me find this?

  Thank you!

  Hi nomad2224

  Right-click (Ctrl-click) on the bar of the column and select a side to add a dimension column.

  

• How to make a reference to a column from the column in a table other source

  Hello
  
  I have a tabular presentation (created using Wizard), in which a selection list, and the values in this list depends on another column in the form of tables.
  
  I tried 'Selection list (query based lov)' and mentioned the other column using #COL_NAME # and directly by COL_NAME, but nothing works.
  
  also tried using the dynamic query 'return "my query" ' but it does not work also.
  
  If someone has worked on a scenario like this, thanks for posting the solution.
  
  I get this error when I tried to the foregoing:

  report error:
  ORA-20001: Error fetching column value: ORA-06550: line 1, column 56:
  PL/SQL: ORA-01744: inappropriate INTO
  ORA-06550: line 1, column 13:
  PL/SQL: SQL Statement ignored

  Apex 4.1
  Oracle 11 g 2
  
  Kind regards
  Tauceef
  
  Published by: Tauceef on 5 December 2012 10:42

  See + {: identifier of the thread = 2250770} +.

• Dependence on the data cube on the fact tables?

  Hello
  
  We have a cube that is built based on a table of facts (with prior calculation of 35%)
  
  The fact table has approximately 400 000 records.
  
  Now I don't want to disturb my cubes but wants to move forward and still changing the data in the fact table, which could include the removal of thousands of records.
  
  SO my question here is how dependent are cube on the fact table data.
  
  The cube stores all the data? Can I go ahead and even to truncate (not drop) the fact table?

  The contents of the cube is not changed until it is built again. So, if you do the following

  (A) complete the table of facts
  (B) create the cube fact table
  (C) Truncate table facts

  Then your cube should always contain the data, and you can question him. The content will change only when you

  (D) create the cube again. At this point my previous answer comes into play.

• OBIEE report with multiple fact tables

  I want to build a report so that it will be have.

  Attribute columns in the dimension D1, D2, D3 tables.

  Measure the columns of the tables of facts F1, F2.

  F1 and F2 are attached with D1, while only F1 joined with D2 and D3.

  When I build this report and run, I see the correct data of F1 but get no matter what value of F2 that the query is not the column measure F2.

  Please help solve this problem.

  This is the point: why haven't you installation of hierarchies for D2 and D3 (when you say logic dimension, I assume that you mean the logical hierarchy as dimensionless, as if there is no D2 and D3)?

  To be able to say OBIEE how manage the absence of joins between D2 - F2 and F2 - D3 you need of them set at grand total level hierarchies and required parameters for the F2 values can be shown next to the F1, D1, D2, D3.

  PS: I assume that your report is D1, D2, D3, F1 and F2, otherwise what to talk of D2 and D3 in the first post?

• Can be parallelized Alter the dimensions of the column to change tables

  Hi all
  
  Can be parallelized Alter tables to the dimensions of the column to change.
  
  I was able to set the explain plan of parallelized command CREATE INDEX and CREATE TABLE STATEMENTS and view the plan of the explain command.
  But when I try to apply the market in PARALLEL for an ALTER TABLE to change column size, explain the plan is a failure.
  
  Ex:
  EXPLAIN THE PLAN TO ALTER / * + PARALLEL (10) * / EMP_BLKP_1 TABLE MODIFY ENAME VARCHAR2 (40);
  ORA-00900: invalid SQL statement
  
  But when I run the alter even outside the plan to explain that it works very well. But I don't know if parallelism is applied for that change the order.
  
  Receive your answer.
  
  Thank you
  NKM

  http://docs.Oracle.com/CD/E11882_01/server.112/e26088/sql_elements006.htm#SQLRF50801

  >
  The PARALLEL indicator tells the optimizer to use the specified number of concurrent servers for parallel operation. The indication applies to SELECT it, INSERT, MERGE, update, and DELETE portions of a declaration, as well as for the table scan part. If no parallel restriction is violated, the flag is ignored.

• related fact table column reference the same table dim

  In my analytical field, my fact table related reference column the same dim table, but in a physical schema, between two tables can have a join, so I create a copy of the Sun table, then finish the join in physics. This method can solve this issue, but not very good, someone at - it a perfect solution?

  You must create aliases for table dim, not just a copy. Why does it resolve the issue?

• In answers am see "Folder is empty" for fact of logic and the Dimension Table

  Hi all
  
  Working OBIEE answers, suddenly when I clicked on the fact table logical he showed me that 'the folder is empty. I restarted all services and then tried shows always the same for the tables of Dimension and fact but logic am able to see all my reports in the files shared. I rebooted the machine too but no change. Please, help me to solve this problem.
  
  Thanks in advance.
  
  Kind regards
  Rajkumar.

  First, follow the label of the forum:
  http://forums.Oracle.com/forums/Ann.jspa?annID=939
  React or mark as answer the message given by the user.

  And for your question, you must check the newspaper for a catalogue of possible corruption:
  OracleBIData_Home\web\log\sawlog0.log

• Calc problem with fact table measure used in the bridge table model

  Hi all
  
  I have problems with the calculation of a measure of table done since I used it as part of a calculation in a bridge table relation.
  
  A table of facts, PROJECT_FACT, I had a column (PROJECT_COST) whose default aggregate is SUM. Whenever PROJECT_COST was used with any dimension, the appropriate aggregation was made at appropriate levels. But, no more. One of the relationships that project_fact is a dimension, called PROJECT.
  
  PROJECT_FACT contains details of employees, and every day they worked on a project. So for one day, employee, Joe, could have a PROJECT_COST $ 80 to 123 project, the next day, Joe might have $40 PROJECT_COST for the same project.
  
  Dimension table, PROJECT, contains details of the project.
  
  A new feature has been added to the software - several customers can now be charged to a PROJECT, where as before, that a single client has been charged.
  This fresh percentage collapse is in a new table - PROJECT_BRIDGE. PROJECT_BRIDGE has the project, CUSTOMER_ID, will BILL_PCT. BILL_PCT always add up to 1.
  
  Thus, the bridge table might look like...
  CUSTOMER_ID BILL_PCT PROJECT
  123 100.20
  123 200.30
  123 300.50
  456 400 1.00
  678 400 1.00
  
  Where to project 123, is a breakdown for multiple clients (. 20,.30.50.)
  
  Let's say in PROJECT_FACT, if you had to sum up all the PROJECT_COST for project = 123, you get $1000.
  
  
  Here are the steps I followed:
  
  -In the physical layer, PROJECT_FACT has a 1:M with PROJECT_BRIDGE and PROJECT_BRIDGE (a 1:M) PROJECT.
  PROJECT_FACT = > PROJECT_BRIDGE < = PROJECT
  
  -In the logical layer, PROJECT has a 1:M with PROJECT_FACT.
  PROJECT = > PROJECT_FACT
  
  -Logical fact table source is mapped to the bridge table, PROJECT_BRIDGE, so now he has several tables, it is mapped (PROJECT_FACT & PROJECT_BRIDGE). They are defined for an INTERNAL join.
  -J' created a measure of calculation, MULT_CUST_COST, using physical columns, which calculates the sum of the PROJECT_COST X the amount of the percentage in the bridge table. It looks like: $ (PROJECT_FACT. PROJECT_COST * PROJECT_BRIDGE. BILL_PCT)
  -J' put MULT_CUST_COST in the presentation layer.
  
  We still want the old PROJECT_COST autour until it happened gradually, it is therefore in the presentation layer as well.
  
  
  Well, I had a request with only project, MULT_CUST_COST (the new calculation) and PROJECT_COST (the original). I expect:
  
  PROJECT_COST MULT_CUST_COST PROJECT
  123. $1000 $1000
  
  I'm getting this for MULT_CUST_COST, however, for PROJECT_COST, it's triple the value (perhaps because there are quantities of 3 percent?)...
  
  PROJECT_COST MULT_CUST_COST PROJECT
  123 $1000 (correct) $3000 (incorrect, it's been tripled)
  
  If I had to watch the SQL, you should:
  SELECT SUM (PROJECT_COST),
  SUM (PROJECT_FACT. PROJECT_COST * PROJECT_BRIDGE. BILL_PCT),
  PROJECT
  Of...
  PROJECT GROUP
  
  
  PROJECT_COST used to work properly at a table of bridge of modeling.
  Any ideas on what I got wrong?
  
  Thank you!

  Hello

  Phew, what a long question!

  If I understand correctly, I think the problem is with your old measure of cost, or rather that combines with you a new one in the same request. If you think about it, your request as explained above will bring back 3 rows from the database, that's why your old measure of cost is multiplied. I think that if you took it out of the query, your bridge table would work properly for the only new measure?

  I would consider the migration of your historical data in the bridge table model so that you have one type of query. For historical data, each would have a single row in the bridge with a 1.0 BILL_PCT.

  Good luck

  Paul
  http://total-bi.com