Planning Analytics

 View Only
Expand all | Collapse all

Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

  • 1.  Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Thu December 05, 2024 07:12 AM

    Hi,

    I've identified a root cause for significant input latency in PAW, version 2.0.98.
    When using member formatting-such as coloring columns or applying cell formats based on value conditions (e.g., <> 0)-I experience a noticeable latency increase.

    • With member format applied: Input latency ~2.60 seconds 
    • Without member format: Input latency ~0.50 seconds

    This has a direct impact on the user experience, especially during heavy data input sessions. Removing the member format resolves the issue but at the cost of visual clarity.

    Has anyone else encountered similar behavior? Are there any known optimizations or workarounds to retain formatting without compromising performance?

    Looking forward to your insights!



    ------------------------------
    Asgeir Thorgeirsson
    Software Engineer, MS
    Icelandair
    Reykjavik
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Thu December 05, 2024 04:36 PM
    Hi Asgeir,
     
    Yes, we experience the same issue. Adding conditional formatting does noticeably slow down the view. While it's understandable that conditional formatting requires additional processing, the performance impact does seem a bit high.


    ------------------------------
    Mario Hasler
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 3.  RE: Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Fri December 06, 2024 07:17 AM

    Since this is affecting our input performance, I have opened a case with IBM. TS018001998



    ------------------------------
    Asgeir Thorgeirsson
    Software Engineer, MS
    Icelandair
    Reykjavik
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 4.  RE: Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Tue December 10, 2024 10:14 AM

    Hello,

    I also have a case open with IBM, TS017857773 regarding log in latency and web sheets opening/calculating.

    The difference for the case I opened is it relates to latency in TM1 Web. 

    TM1 Web has been the primary user interface for 10 years and has several customized web page home objects for different types of users. 

    Conditional formatting is a big issue on performance, but as mentioned is very good to assist with data visualizations.

    I am hoping for a solution soon.



    ------------------------------
    Susan Monks
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 5.  RE: Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Fri March 07, 2025 06:51 AM

    Hello Asgeir,
    it looks like we run into the same issue.
    Has there been a resolution for your IBM support ticket TS018001998 ?
    It seems like 2.1.2 = 2.0.95 was the last version not to suffer this performance penalty. All later versions suffer it.
    Regards



    ------------------------------
    Bernd Siebert
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 6.  RE: Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Fri December 06, 2024 11:48 AM
    Edited by NICK PLOWDEN Tue December 10, 2024 11:44 AM

    Hi,

    Thank you for your insights!

    We encoutered this behaviour in PAW Local 2.0.96 and PAW Cloud 2.0.99. The latency with Conditional Formatting becomes 2-3 sec higher, as you mention. 

    I have opened case too, TS017909906.


    ------------------------------
    Martin Rimka
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Fri March 07, 2025 06:53 AM

    Hello Martin,
    it looks like we run into the same issue.
    Has there been a resolution for your IBM support ticket TS017909906 ?
    It seems like 2.1.2 = 2.0.95 was the last version not to suffer this performance penalty. All later versions suffer it.
    Regards



    ------------------------------
    Bernd Siebert
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 8.  RE: Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Mon March 10, 2025 04:16 AM

    Hello Bernd,
    IBM support was able to replicate the issue, and we could confirm that the latency issue was not related to the customer database or reports. After some consideration, the customer decided to postpone further investigation.



    ------------------------------
    Martin Rimka
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 9.  RE: Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Fri March 07, 2025 11:18 AM

    IBM proposes the following solution
    Although this might ease someone's pain, it will not resolve the performance issue when a member is compared to a member.
    I use member compared to itself a lot to color levels or values of a consolidated member.   

    So I guess, this fix will not ease my pain



    ------------------------------
    Asgeir Thorgeirsson
    Software Engineer, MS
    Icelandair
    Reykjavik
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 10.  RE: Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Sat March 08, 2025 08:26 AM

    Hi Asgeir,

    I've also traditionally used a lot of MEMBER = Itself conditional formatting to highlight input rows or subtotals etc.

    The way I am reading the suggestions is that we could still benefit from the performance improvement but would need to replace the single condition with 2 that return the same format e.g. for numeric cells you could have 1 with condition MEMBER = 0 and another with MEMBER <> 0.

    The resulting format should be the same but it adheres to the comparing to a constant suggestion. 

    With the current latency being so noticeable; I am hoping that the improvement will outweigh the fact that there are now 2 conditions where previously there would have been 1. Hopefully there could be an addition to the formatting in the future where its not really conditional and you can just set a static format for any cell associated with a certain member - this is what we are doing here and I expect most applications in PAW would be doing the same fairly often. Saving the system from having to confirm that 1 = 1 over and over again.

    Unfortunately I will still have a lot of conditions that MUST be reliant on another member (e.g. differentiating whether it is a forecast or actual period etc.) 

    Thanks for sharing the update.



    ------------------------------
    Declan Rodger
    Technical Director
    Spitfire Analytics
    Manchester
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 11.  RE: Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Wed March 12, 2025 03:08 PM
    Edited by Mario Hasler Wed March 12, 2025 03:09 PM
    A "Known Issue" entry has now been created for this problem:

    Planning Analytics Workspace - Latency Issue with Member Format

    I hope IBM will fully resolve this issue without the limitations outlined in the response Asgeir received from support. 



    ------------------------------
    Mario Hasler
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 12.  RE: Input Latency Issue with Member Format in PAW

    Posted Wed March 26, 2025 12:10 PM

    Hi,

    I tested this in version 102, and MEMBER = Itself seems to work fine. The performance issue occurs when comparing one member to another. As Declan pointed out, we also rely on conditions that must compare to another member, especially for differentiating between forecast and actual periods. So while this fix helps in cases like MEMBER = Itself, input performance will still be slow in many other scenarios, which remains a problem for users. As a workaround, activating the grid refresh option "Defer on leaf data change" can help.

    I asked in the last Ask Me Anything session whether this issue will eventually be fully fixed without limitations so that performance returns to how it was before version 96, when the problem first appeared. Unfortunately, I didn't get an answer, so I'll try again in the next session.

    Also, if I understood correctly, the new Hierarchy Property-Based Formatting feature should be released soon. The question is whether using this feature instead of traditional conditional formatting will improve input performance.



    ------------------------------
    Mario Hasler
    ------------------------------

    Original Message