Skip to main content
Announcements
Join us at Qlik Connect for 3 magical days of learning, networking,and inspiration! REGISTER TODAY and save!
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Anonymous
Not applicable

Change in Expression

Dear Friends

We have a text object having large expression  (inefficient performance) where in amount is being calculated along with different service tax for different periods. Hence the expression has become long.

We intend to remove the  service tax calculations for previous years and keep only for 2017 .

(By removing getfieldselections function for April,  June 2016 etc.)

However I am getting confused to implement the same by modifying the expression.

The attachment contains the expression.

Thanks & Regards

Chintan Gala

Message was edited by: Chintan Gala To clear the confusion, Have added another text object which shows what changes are intended.

10 Replies
sunny_talwar

How do we find service tax within your formula? is it part of set analysis or do you have a field which says Service Tax Amount?

Anonymous
Not applicable
Author

Hello Sunny

There is no seperate field such as Service Tax.  Hence the amount is multiplied by 100/109 to get 9% as the service tax amount.

As the expression is heavy-  the text objects do not appear on browser,  we are thinking to remove the different service tax calculations for different periods and instead just calculate present 9% rate.

Thanks & Regards

Chintan.

sunny_talwar

So what exactly are you trying to remove? I am not sure I understand what is getting removed from the expression? Anywhere where the date if 2016 or less?

Anonymous
Not applicable
Author

Yes exactly.  Only calculate service tax as 9%  irrespective of the period selected.

(Remove previous different calculations for different periods), which would make the expression lighter.

Anonymous
Not applicable
Author

Dear Sunny

I have added a text object 'New Expression' to clear the confusion regarding what we intend to make.

Regards

Chintan

sunny_talwar

So are you looking to get rid of the commented part and still the expression should work? Is that the goal?

Anonymous
Not applicable
Author

Yes, exacty!

sunny_talwar

Check the attached

Anonymous
Not applicable
Author

Dear Sunny

Thanks for your reply.

The result is coming different.  (338 versus 331).

I am trying to comment more of the code with same conditions till the bottom and check again. I will let u know if I need further help.

Regards

Chintan