Unlock a world of possibilities! Login now and discover the exclusive benefits awaiting you.
Hi everyone,
I have some values to be associated with a huge table only by one dimension. To avoid joining them in load script I want simply to Concatenate several rows and use them in expression. With set analisys like {$<Field1={'AddedRows'}>} I get these values but only one per dimension not per each row. Is it possible, can anybody help me?
Hi,
Creating a new table with Organization and New Field is the best option instead of concatenating into the existing table.
Regards,
Jagan.
Can you elaborate further? Could you post some sample lines of records and your requested result in the chart?
Filter | Date | Organization | Material | New Field |
---|---|---|---|---|
Old row | 01.01.2016 | Organization 1 | Material 1 | |
Old row | 01.01.2016 | Organization 1 | Material 2 | |
Old row | 03.01.2016 | Organization 2 | Material 2 | |
Old row | 03.01.2016 | Organization 3 | Material 1 | |
Old row | 03.01.2016 | Organization 3 | Material 3 | |
New row | Organization 1 | Val 1 | ||
New row | Organization 2 | Val 2 | ||
New row | Organization 3 | Val 3 | ||
As above I concatenated several rows with one dimension "Organization" and "New Field" with values. I need to associate them with "Organization" in every row of a chart
If you want your New Field values to be associated to and by Organization, have you considered either
- using a table with two fields Organization and New Field, linked by Organization to your huge table
- using a MAPPING table and ApplyMap() to map New Field values to you huge table when LOADing the huge table
?
Ya, but this table has about 100 000 000 lines and 10 - 15 values to associate with them. And left join does it well but I thought this way could be more compatible
Hi,
Creating a new table with Organization and New Field is the best option instead of concatenating into the existing table.
Regards,
Jagan.
Exactly, it seems that's i've been looking for. Just a new table... Thanks a lot Jagan, best regards
Ok, that's why I suggested two ways, one being a linked table.
If you are using a linked table, note that the JOIN will be executed implicitely in the front end aggregation enginge, if you are using two fields from your two tables in the same aggregation.
There are also ways to use a single MAPPING LOAD table to map multiple fields, using a concatenation / split approach.
You are right, swuehl. But I realized that having read another post. Thanks