I am not sure there is a hard limit, but I can assure you that your performance is going to suffer if you have this many dimensions. I cannot help but ask why so many in a single table? What are these dimensions? Regardless, it should work. I just tested with +50 and besides lackluster performance, it worked as it should.
So perhaps something with your data, but impossible to say without seeing.
More than 50 columns yes, but more than 50 dimensions?
I am not sure about the hard limit (probably 255 or more if I know our developers correctly) so that should be no problem.
However, Donald Hutchins' point above is very relevant, A straight table is a hypercube with all the limitations of a hypercube. Too many dimensions will eat your memory and severly affect performance. You should instead
- put the different dimensions in different charts
- put the field as expression ( Only(<Field>) ) instead of as dimension.
Hi all ...thanks for all the help.As suggested by Donald, i had a issue with the expression that I was using, and I changed the expression now,and its working fine.But as suggested by all...performance is getting a huge hit.the table goes out of memory many a times.The reason for having so many dimension is, my client wants to see many fields(coming from many tables in database)in this report together, and be able to download it in a excel.They want to be just able to download it...and they are not looking forward to use it in front end :(:(. I will try and use Henric's idea and see if that improves performance.