Unlock a world of possibilities! Login now and discover the exclusive benefits awaiting you.
Hello Everyone
I Need to help Finished My Query in Load Editor
In this Data I want to calculate Column Cogsacal By Id and date
My Formula Expression use
if(RowNo()=1,Amount/[GR Qty],
(((above(if(RowNo()=1,[GR Qty]-SUM(InvoiceQuantity))))*above(TOTAL COGS))+(Amount))
/If(RowNo()=1,Sum([GR Qty]),RangeSum(Above( Sum([GR Qty]),1,RowNo()),-Sum([GR Qty]))))
In Excel Formula is Using (Above Stock) * Above (Cogsa) + Amount / Stock
And I want to calculate Using Load Editor using Range And Peek
This My Formula in Load Editor
My Expectation In column Cogsacal can get 894.432 in Colum Third and Colum 2 is 910.754 because is not have a Gr QTY
Please Help Me to resolved my problem in Qlik Sense
Thank you
There are some things which might be related to not resulting the expected values. The field-name in peek() isn't wrapped with single-quotes. In previous releases this could cause errors - nowadays I'm not sure if it accepted field-names without spaces or special chars in this way.
More relevant will be the order by statements within the loads with the interrecord-functions. In "Stock" it is only the date and in "Cogsacal" is it date and id - both statements needs to be checked. I could imagine that it should be rather:
order by Id, Date;
Means at first Id and then Date (by the last you may also consider the direction of asc or desc).
Further it's quite unusual to apply a cumulative logic with the range- and interrecord-functions without the use of any if-loops. In the most simple cases it are things like: if(rowno() = 1, ...) and/or if(Field = previous(Field), ...) and not seldom are nested if-loops needed to check the values of the current/previous records before applying any cumulative logic and/or branching in various versions. In some cases it could be a bit tricky but if you add a recno() and rowno() to these loads and also all the check- and cumulative logic in their parts to the load the behaviour/results could be easily checked within a table-box.
Beside this "Stock" is loaded with a where-condition and afterwards is a join applied - are you sure that this join worked like expected without changing the number of records?
- Marcus
There are some things which might be related to not resulting the expected values. The field-name in peek() isn't wrapped with single-quotes. In previous releases this could cause errors - nowadays I'm not sure if it accepted field-names without spaces or special chars in this way.
More relevant will be the order by statements within the loads with the interrecord-functions. In "Stock" it is only the date and in "Cogsacal" is it date and id - both statements needs to be checked. I could imagine that it should be rather:
order by Id, Date;
Means at first Id and then Date (by the last you may also consider the direction of asc or desc).
Further it's quite unusual to apply a cumulative logic with the range- and interrecord-functions without the use of any if-loops. In the most simple cases it are things like: if(rowno() = 1, ...) and/or if(Field = previous(Field), ...) and not seldom are nested if-loops needed to check the values of the current/previous records before applying any cumulative logic and/or branching in various versions. In some cases it could be a bit tricky but if you add a recno() and rowno() to these loads and also all the check- and cumulative logic in their parts to the load the behaviour/results could be easily checked within a table-box.
Beside this "Stock" is loaded with a where-condition and afterwards is a join applied - are you sure that this join worked like expected without changing the number of records?
- Marcus
Thank you Mr.Marcus to answer my problem.
i think not sure Mr Marcus because if in load editor don't have a where condition number in data changing.
Sorry, I don't understand ...
Sorry, Mr Marcus For my response i mean to answear your Question
Is Mean with a Join in stock many my data is changing the number of record
But thank you sir for help me to resolved my problem
-Vialli