Skip to main content
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Not applicable

Set Analysis Expression Aggregation Issue

Hey All,

First of all, thank for the taking the time to view and assist. I may be overlooking something here but this is giving me a headache.

Objective: I'm looking to to reflect the various departmental collections within the selection (Month(s)) time frame. e.g. Bankrutpcy/Recovery by Time.

Problem: It's aggregating the departments collections throughout the entire data set (over all the Months), regardless of the {$} indication. Despite the user selecting a specific month, it reflects the the SUM throughout all of time.

Here is an example formulas

SUM({$<[Department] = {'Recovery'}>}[PRINPMT_28_1]) + SUM({$<[Department] = {'Recovery'}>} [PRINNSF_28_2])

To calculate the total collected, We add the PRINPMT_28_1 + PRINNSF_28_2 to reconcile the payments that bounced, or transactions that were removed from books.

The same formual exists in a different expression that shows how much of a particular amount was collected for a various client by the Bankruptcy department.

This makes a very easy and convenient way for the user to see how much of the "SUM" came from which department.

I hope I articulated this enough for everyone.

Thanks,

1 Solution

Accepted Solutions
Not applicable
Author

Noob Mistake

I didn't reference the alt. state appropriately.

({[Gross Dollar Comparison]<[Department] = {'Recovery'}>}[PRINPMT_28_1]) + SUM({[Gross Dollar Comparison]<[Department] = {'Recovery'}>}[PRINNSF_28_2])

Thanks for your time, I do appreciate it. Apologies for the lack of clarity.

View solution in original post

4 Replies
Gysbert_Wassenaar

Sorry, but it's not articulated enough for me. It's impossible to tell from your post what's happening in your document. Try posting a sample document that demonstrates the problem. Read this document to find out how you can create a small non-confidential document: Preparing examples for Upload - Reduction and Data Scrambling.


talk is cheap, supply exceeds demand
Anonymous
Not applicable
Author

It is hard to tell, but let me guess...

If you want the expression result to be independent from selections ("regardless of the {$} indication"), you have to use set identifier 1 rater than $.  Maybe this:

SUM({1<[Department] = {'Recovery'}>}[PRINPMT_28_1]) + SUM({1<[Department] = {'Recovery'}>} [PRINNSF_28_2])

But, as Gysbert Wassenaar said, can't tell for sure without an example

Not applicable
Author

It seems to be an issue related to the alternate states within the document. When I apply the alternate state, it disregards the current selection (which is NOT desired) opposed to me specifying the inhereted state it DOES consider the current selections.

Not applicable
Author

Noob Mistake

I didn't reference the alt. state appropriately.

({[Gross Dollar Comparison]<[Department] = {'Recovery'}>}[PRINPMT_28_1]) + SUM({[Gross Dollar Comparison]<[Department] = {'Recovery'}>}[PRINNSF_28_2])

Thanks for your time, I do appreciate it. Apologies for the lack of clarity.