<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Metric Performance issue in QlikView</title>
    <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086697#M361782</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am assuming you have both Field1 and Field2 as dimensions in one table which might be creating a massively huge table which might be causing the issue&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;May be join the two tables in the back end to get a better performance on the front end&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:11:14 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>sunny_talwar</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-04-22T12:11:14Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Metric Performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086693#M361778</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are trying to create a metric-- ignoring all the filters in the layout except for two FIELD1,FIELD2&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;we are able to get the correct data. Using the following expression&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Count(Distinct TOTAL&amp;lt;FIELD1,FIELD2&amp;gt;{1&amp;lt;FIELD1=$::FIELD1,FIELD2=$::FIELD2&amp;gt;}USERS)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;But we run into serious performance issues. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;There are two tables TABLEA contains FIELD1 and has 15million rows&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;TABLEB contains FIELD2 and has 1million rows&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Both these tables are joined on USERS id. Please suggest an alternatice approach to get the same result with better&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;performance&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks in advance&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 11:51:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086693#M361778</guid>
      <dc:creator>Chanty4u</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-22T11:51:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Metric Performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086694#M361779</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Not sure if this would help you or not... &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://community.qlik.com/docs/DOC-1334"&gt;Ignore all selections except some specific fields using Set Analysis&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:01:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086694#M361779</guid>
      <dc:creator>MK_QSL</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-22T12:01:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Metric Performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086695#M361780</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I think you should consider to change your datamodel and transfer both fields into a single table then otherwise will be the virtual table which needs to be created very large, see also: &lt;A href="https://community.qlik.com/qlik-blogpost/3214"&gt;Logical Inference and Aggregations&lt;/A&gt;.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;- Marcus&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:04:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086695#M361780</guid>
      <dc:creator>marcus_sommer</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-22T12:04:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Metric Performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086696#M361781</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;In which context are you using this expression? Chart (type)? Dimensions?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:05:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086696#M361781</guid>
      <dc:creator>swuehl</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-22T12:05:27Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Metric Performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086697#M361782</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I am assuming you have both Field1 and Field2 as dimensions in one table which might be creating a massively huge table which might be causing the issue&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;May be join the two tables in the back end to get a better performance on the front end&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:11:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086697#M361782</guid>
      <dc:creator>sunny_talwar</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-22T12:11:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Metric Performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086698#M361783</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Swuehl,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are using this expression in a measure which is used in a pivot table.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:18:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086698#M361783</guid>
      <dc:creator>Chanty4u</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-22T12:18:16Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Metric Performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086699#M361784</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Sunny,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We tried combining the Table 1 and Table 2 which has resulted in a huge data set. Which lead to considerably long load time.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We would really like to keep the backend tables as is,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Is there any alternate expression that we could use in the measure to improve the performance but get the same result set.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:26:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086699#M361784</guid>
      <dc:creator>Chanty4u</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-22T12:26:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Metric Performance issue</title>
      <link>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086700#M361785</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I guess it comes down to a choice between back end load time vs. front end performance &lt;IMG src="https://community.qlik.com/legacyfs/online/emoticons/happy.png" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Apr 2016 12:29:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.qlik.com/t5/QlikView/Metric-Performance-issue/m-p/1086700#M361785</guid>
      <dc:creator>sunny_talwar</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-22T12:29:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

