hi,
a single context contains two fact tables i.e. F1 -> F2, now F1 is joined to a dimension table D1. now i want to extract information from F2 and D1, hence i am joining them using a shortcut join. this is the only way i see to get around this problem, since i dont want to go through two fact tables to extract information from D1 and F2.
Any suggestions on this one? Any drawbacks
The only other option I see is introducing new contexts in the universe.
zephyrous (BOB member since 2007-01-12)
I would go with 2 contexts.
The problem in your current 1-context case is when you select dimensions from D1 and measures from F1 and F2. Then you may have fan trap that needs to be resolved.
Marek Chladny 
(BOB member since 2003-11-27)
Hi marek,
I would do the same, but the case being that this is an existing design and I need to find a way to extract the informaion from D1 and F2.
I dont think it will hamper the design if I use a shortcut join, since if I extract information from F1, F2 and D1, the joins will not include the shortcut join but the join between F1 and D1 AND F1 and F2.
yes but I agree I will have to make sure a Fan Trap is avoided.
zephyrous (BOB member since 2007-01-12)
If you have design like this D1-<F1-<F2 ,and don’t have any dimensions from either F1 nor F2, I would just simply solve this fan trap without contexts. Just turn on “Multiple SQL Statements for each measure” and you are safe and can use combination of objects you mentioned.
Marfi 
(BOB member since 2006-12-18)
I think a shortcut join is the right approach if you believe D1 and F2 can be joined in a single SQL statement.
JMCabot (BOB member since 2005-12-21)
If it is at all possible for users to take measures from both fact tables then you must consider contexts. It’s a recommended solution and would make life easier.
What I will add is that it will make life easier if you document your design decision on the universe schema canvas.