Better solution Required?

[ashmitp869]

Hi All ,

I have to build a report for bank - 'SA Taxi' only like below

And I got more banks in my model like below

My solution is -

As bank is a dimension

i made bank is =if(bank='SA Taxi',bank,null())

and I made check the 'Suppress when values is null'

Is there any better way to do the solution - to only reflect 'SA Taxi' Bank in the report .?

Many Thanks,

[awhitfield]

Hi,

what sort of chart are you using?

Andy

[paulferguson80]

Hi,

Have you tried Set Analysis in the expression?

Something like:

Dimension - bank (or anything you want)

Expression - sum({<bank = {'SA Taxi'}>} SumField)

Thanks Paul

[ashmitp869]

Hi Andy ,

I am using straight table ,

All of them are dimension except on expression.

Thanks,

[ashmitp869]

Hi Paul,

I am using straight table ,

All of them are dimension except on expression ( I can use you suggestion ).

Please let me know what to do with the dimension .?

Thanks,

[evan_kurowski · Accepted solution]

For a dimension filtration expression...

=Aggr( Only({1 <bank = {'SA Taxi'}>} bank), bank)

I often find filtrations on the dimension become a little more necessary than filtration via expressions solely because my charts inevitably start filling up with a variety of expressions (and embedded set-analysis criteria).  If I make a ui selection in the field bank, or start applying set-analysis in multiple expressions, the challenge becomes not only does 1 expression have to maintain the filtration, but now ALL of the expressions have to maintain the filtration.  Once your straight table is 15 complicated expressions across, you're just like Ok just take it out at the dimension!

If you can get the filtration cleanly at dimensional level, you can be as sloppy as you like in the expressions, the other banks ain't gettin in there!   For the most durable conditions (where you find selections in UI objects are making the chart go blank or allowing filtered out values to re-enter, and taking into account alternate states, sometimes a combination of reaffirming the filtration at both expressions & dimensions to complement each other works the most consistently across most interaction permutations (and I say "most", because "all" is very hard to predict/ensure, that's like claiming any software is "bug free", who can make such guarantees?))