Linking Data Providers Problem

building reports desktopintelligence
1

When linking two separate data providers based on a common dimension object, one of the aggregated measure objects (SUM function of measure object in data provider #2) doesn’t seem to function correctly when report sectioned on additional dimensions. Two of the three dimension objects only exist in data provider #1. The third dimension object creates the link between data providers. Is this a limitation of Business Objects?

Russ Coble
Information Technology Analyst
John Deere Credit - Des Moines
Phone: (515) 267-3794
E-Mail: CobleRussell@JDCorp.deere.com

Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)

2

I think your problem is the same that we have had. In this case it¥s in my opinion a error in BO, in the opinion of BO a problem of presenting the data.
You can reduce our problem to the following with the Univers “Island Resort Marketing”:

  • One report with two Data-Providers (DP):
    1. DP: Region, Service, Number of Guests - 2. DP: Region, Revenue
  • Provider linked by Region.
  • Service as section in the report.
  • Create two tables in one report:
  • Table 1: Region (2. DP), Revenue, Number of Guests - Table 2: Region (2. DP), Revenue
  • Result => The Revenue for every shown region is identical in both tables. - Create a global filter on Service, that shows all services (Bungalow, Hotel Room, Hotel Suite). In Reality this “filter” doesn¥t filter anything (but not in BO!). But you can also set a “real” filter, the result is the same.
  • Result => The Revenue for a Region in the first table is another than the Revenue for the same region in the second table!!! You get two tables standing side by side showing different results!!! - I don¥t know if this problem still exists in BO 5, we use BO 4.

Maybe this is the same problem you have. BO said, that it is logical incorrect to show the results in this way. I dont¥t agree, because we have in reality the problem to show this kind of reports.
In my opinion this is a bug in BO. How can you explain a user, that if he doesn¥t “filter” anything, he gets two different results. As a result, we try to avoid filters in a report, because we never can be shure that the shown results are correct.

Joern Hecker
Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg (Germany)
Senatsamt fuer Bezirksangelegenheiten
Joern.Hecker@sfb.hamburg.de

=======================================================

On Tue, 25 Jan 2000 12:50:30 -0600, Coble Russell CobleRussell@JDCORP.DEERE.COM wrote:

When linking two separate data providers based on a common dimension object, one of the aggregated measure objects (SUM function of measure object in data provider #2) doesn’t seem to function correctly when report sectioned on additional dimensions.

Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)

3

I haven’t given this a tremendous amount of thought, but try using:
Multicube(sum()) instead of sum()

This has helped me immeasureably on several reports in V5.

Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)

4

One of the most powerful and therefore complicated features of Business Objects is the ability to create multiple data providers for a single document. This question came out several weeks ago:

In a message dated 00-01-25 13:50:51 EST, you write:

When linking two separate data providers based on a common dimension object,
one of the aggregated measure objects (SUM function of measure object in data provider #2) doesn’t seem to function correctly when report sectioned on additional dimensions. Two of the three dimension objects only exist in data provider #1. The third dimension object creates the link between data providers.

Linking dimensions is only one step required to build a report with two or more data providers. The other step is to understand the following:

The lowest VALID level of detail for measures is provided by the dimensions that are common to both data providers.

There was another response to this question that I have included here, along with my annotations…

In a message dated 00-01-26 10:22:01 EST, you write:

I think your problem is the same that we have had. In this case it¥s in my
opinion a error in BO, in the opinion of BO a problem of presenting the data.
You can reduce our problem to the following with the Univers “Island Resort Marketing”:

  • One report with two Data-Providers (DP):
    1. DP: Region, Service, Number of Guests - 2. DP: Region, Revenue
  • Provider linked by Region.

So far, there are no problems with this scenario.

  • Service as section in the report.

Now you have a problem. One data provider (#1 above) is at a lower level of detail than the other (#2). Number 1 has two dimensions, Number 2 has only one. Because of this, the lowest VALID level of reporting is by the top level dimension of Region. This is a restriction based on the available data.

  • Create two tables in one report:
  • Table 1: Region (2. DP), Revenue, Number of Guests - Table 2: Region (2. DP), Revenue
  • Result => The Revenue for every shown region is identical in both tables.

This is correct. There is no way to “allocate” revenue across Service, when that data is not available. A Measure object is defined to roll up to the common level of detail: in this case, the common level (and therefore the lowest valid reporting level) is Region.

  • Create a global filter on Service, that shows all services (Bungalow, Hotel Room, Hotel Suite). In Reality this “filter” doesn¥t filter anything (but not in BO!). But you can also set a “real” filter, the result is the same.
  • Result => The Revenue for a Region in the first table is another than the Revenue for the same region in the second table!!! You get two tables standing side by side showing different results!!!

The filter result is irrelevant. You are essentially compounding the error created by having created a section report (Master Detail) using a Dimension object that is beyond the level of detail that is valid for this report.

  • I don¥t know if this problem still exists in BO 5, we use BO 4.

This problem is not a problem, as stated, with the application. The problem is in the way the report is constructed.

I can recreate this “error” without resorting (pun) to a Master Detail report. Create two data providers as follows:

DP1: Resort, Year, Revenue
DP2: Resort, Number of Guests

Next, create a combined block with Resort, Year, Revenue, Number of Guests. You will note that the data (shown below) shows that Revenue is allocated across both the Resort and the Year dimensions, but that Number of Guests is only valid at the Resort level.

Resort(Query 1 with Beach) Year Revenue Number of guests Bahamas Beach FY93 287,929.00 565.00 << each value Bahamas Beach FY94 307,400.00 565.00 << repeats three Bahamas Beach FY95 376,115.00 565.00 << times French Riviera FY93 295,940.00 446.00
French Riviera FY94 280,310.00 446.00
French Riviera FY95 259,170.00 446.00
Hawaiian Club FY93 479,685.00 540.00
Hawaiian Club FY94 519,530.00 540.00
Hawaiian Club FY95 480,445.00 540.00

Adding a Filter or a Section report does not change the fact that the data is not valid to begin with. Again, to restate: Combined data provider documents are only valid at the most detailed level of common dimensions to all data providers. I don’t see this as a bug or even a limitation of BusObj.

Regards,
Dave Rathbun
Integra Solutions
www.islink.com

Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)

5

The answer of Dave Rathbun / Integra Solutions (dated 00-02-11 16:43:55 EST) shows one point of view to the problem. Business Objects shares his point of view.
In my point of view (refering now not my own example but the example of Dave Rathbun)the users knows that the DP2 shows the , regardless of the kontext that is shown. Because of that we expexted that BO shows the number of guests of each in every occurrence of the year if you get a section . Even if the Data-Provider that contains is at a more detailed level. We wanted to get the same (565) for “Bahamas Beach” in each section of , regardless if you set a filter on year or not.

In our real report the section (it¥s not the year, it¥s the location) is necessary because of the distribution of the report. Example for the type of our expectation / wanted report.
SECTION: Year
TABLE: Resort | Revenue | Number of guests

Our expected results:

FY93

Bahamas Beach 287,929.00 565.00
French Riviera 295,940.00 446.00
Hawaiian Club 479,685.00 540.00

FY94

Bahamas Beach 307,400.00 565.00
French Riviera 280,310.00 446.00
Hawaiian Club 519,530.00 540.00

FY95

Bahamas Beach 376,115.00 565.00
French Riviera 259,170.00 446.00
Hawaiian Club 480,445.00 540.00

Our problem: You get wrong results for if you use a filter on .

Now I tried a solution that seems to work also with filters: Instead of using

as the formula use
Sum () !!!
(I think “sum()” is the correct function in the english version of BO for the german function “summe()”.)
I tested just two simple examples but it seems to work and show the correct values regardless of used filters.
Our expectation was that BO uses the sum-function implizit - like it normaly does - and you not have to name the function explizit. I hope that this (long) discussions solve the problem of the original question too.

Joern Hecker
Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg (Germany)
Senatsamt fuer Bezirksangelegenheiten
Joern.Hecker@sfb.hamburg.de

Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)

6

Dave,
I have downloaded some of your conference presentations about variables and combining multiple data providers.

However, when I tried to open the reports, I got the following error message “You are not authorized to use this document”.

Business Objects is installed on my machine as a stand-alone with no access to a repository. Is that the problem? or you don’t want people to open your files without specific authorization?

Regards,

Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)

7

Build yourself a little repository in MS Access. If you log on using a general supervisor id, you should be able to open anything.

Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)

8

In a message dated Tue, 18 Dec 2001 7:33:42 AM Eastern Standard Time, Stateson Duplan s_duplan@HOTMAIL.COM writes:

Dave,
I have downloaded some of your conference presentations about variables and combining multiple data providers.

However, when I tried to open the reports, I got the following error message “You are not authorized to use this document”.

Business Objects is installed on my machine as a stand-alone with no access to a repository. Is that the problem? or you don’t want people to open your files without specific authorization?

Apparently this is a new “feature” of BusObj. If you create a universe or document is a “secure” environment (meaning that you have a key file) even if you never export the document it still gets marked. I know this happens with universe files, so I guess it is possible to have this happen with document files as well.

We will get them fixed and re-uploaded, but for now if you do as someone else has suggested and just create a simple MS Access repository and key file, you should be able to open them.

Regards,
Dave Rathbun
Integra Solutions
www.islink.com

Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)

9

Dave,
We recently distributed some of the documents created in ‘secure’ environment as demo to a client and faced the same problem. Just ‘Save for all user’ using General supervisor helped in opening the documents
under ‘unsecure’(standalone BO without repository).

-Durgesh

Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)

10

In a message dated Tue, 18 Dec 2001 1:46:44 PM Eastern Standard Time, Durgesh Das DDas@USANINC.COM writes:

Dave,
We recently distributed some of the documents created in ‘secure’ environment as demo to a client and faced the same problem. Just ‘Save for all user’ using General supervisor helped in opening the documents
under ‘unsecure’(standalone BO without repository).

Yes, I have found the same thing. I don’t know when this started, because originally documents that were created and never exported were not secured. So now you must always do a “save for all users” if you are distributing items like we do on our web site.

Universes work the same way. Any universe that has never been exported but was created after logging in to a repository is now automatically secured, which means that nobody can access it until it has been resaved.

I’m not convinced that this is a step forward. :slight_smile:

Regards,
Dave Rathbun
Integra Solutions
www.islink.com

Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)

11

Thanks. I am now able to open all the files.

Listserv Archives (BOB member since 2002-06-25)