Planning Analytics

Planning Analytics

Get AI-infused integrated business planning

 View Only
  • 1.  Synchronization in a more sophisticated way

    Posted Thu February 24, 2022 03:26 PM
    Hello all,

    Say that I have 1 dimension called "Period". It contains concatenated yyyy-mm elements (for every year, 12 months, 4 quarters, a total year).
    Also in the same dimension, all YTD elements (consolidated) so meaning 12 YTD elements like "YTD yyyy-mm". And a bunch of other elements.

    Now I would like to synchronize objects (views to start with) in PAW. The requirement is that on a cover page the user selects "2022-02" out of let's say the list 2022-01, 2022-02, 2022-03, ..., 2022-12. Objects should synchronize on other pages to show February 2022 data. If we are in November 2022 the user selects 2022-11 and it synchronizes. All not very difficult.

    But, some selections should be the corresponding YTD period, that is, I need "YTD 2022-02" in the rows or the columns or the filters of a view. In November, I need "YTD 2022-11". Or I need the YTD period and its corresponding children.

    How can we do this ? I have a workaround solution in that the user enters manually the values of 2022 and 02 in a certain (small) system cube, and MDX statements in the different views will gather the correct periods. As the selections could differ by user (some users might want to filter and look back on January now in February), the cube must contain the }Clients dimension and MDX'es get even more cumbersome.

    A related workaround would be to have a TI process, after the selection of the period, that updates the (static) subsets. The TI process can pick up the chosen period and fill subsets but the subsets need to be user-specific, no ? Otherwise 1 user forces the selection of all other users.

    Can't we have a way that the user just selects element 2022-03 and this selection synchronizes to views, knowing that some method needs to be there to pick up the selection and retrieve related elements. It seems overkill to have the chosen selection end up in a cube and needing to write MDX statements, the more since it needs to be done by user.

    What are your thoughts ?

    Thanks !

    ------------------------------
    Wim Gielis
    ------------------------------

    #PlanningAnalyticswithWatson


  • 2.  RE: Synchronization in a more sophisticated way

    Posted Fri February 25, 2022 01:21 AM
    HI Wim,

    This is definitely a recurring request here and in discussions on other forums.

    Idea 777 was logged to address exactly what you are asking for.

    I think being able to refer to members in the title dimensions or the set/member selectors dragged onto the canvas, through variables would solve many of our issues.

    With the new set editor, the ability to select the the variable and incorporate into the MDX would be ideal:

    Could write something like:
    {StrToMember("[Period].[" + $DATABASE.DIMENSION + "]")}

    The above would read the member from the referenced widget.
    Alternatively, if you could name the selectors, you could reference by name.

    Not sure that it helps your cause but there are many IBM customers all asking for the same thing.

    ------------------------------
    George Tonkin
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: Synchronization in a more sophisticated way

    Posted Fri February 25, 2022 03:24 AM
    Thank you very much George.
    I must admit that I did not check earlier threads here and elsewhere.
    I do echo that this piece of functionality is very much needed. Other, very similar, tools I work with allow it and much more too.

    ------------------------------
    Wim Gielis
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: Synchronization in a more sophisticated way

    Posted Fri February 25, 2022 05:26 AM
    Edited by System Admin Fri January 20, 2023 04:43 PM
    Have added my support for this enhancement.  This would open up a lot of functionality that we currently work around.  Either by Wim's method or occasionally by using spare dimensions and coding into the MDX.  I'll give you an example of this to show what you have asked for:

    WITH
    MEMBER [SpareDim1].[SpareDim1].[YTD] AS (STRTOMEMBER("[YrPdDim].[YrPdDim].[" + [YrPdDim].[YrPdDim].CURRENTMEMBER.PROPERTIES("Year") + " YTD " + [YrPdDim].[YrPdDim].CURRENTMEMBER.PROPERTIES("Month") + "]"),
    [SpareDim1].[SpareDim1].[ElementYouActuallyWant]),FORMAT_STRING='#,##0;(#,##0);0'
    SELECT NON EMPTY {
    [SpareDim1].[SpareDim1].[YTD]
    } DIMENSION PROPERTIES MEMBER_UNIQUE_NAME, MEMBER_NAME, MEMBER_CAPTION, LEVEL_NUMBER, CHILDREN_CARDINALITY,
    [SpareDim1].[SpareDim1].[Caption] ON 0,
    {[OTHERDIM].[OTHERDIM].[Elem1]}
    DIMENSION PROPERTIES MEMBER_UNIQUE_NAME, MEMBER_NAME, MEMBER_CAPTION, LEVEL_NUMBER, CHILDREN_CARDINALITY,
    [OTHERDIM].[OTHERDIM].[Caption] ON 1
    FROM [Cube]
    WHERE ([YrPdDim].[YrPdDim].[ 2021 12] ) DIMENSION PROPERTIES MEMBER_UNIQUE_NAME, MEMBER_NAME, MEMBER_CAPTION, LEVEL_NUMBER, CHILDREN_CARDINALITY

    This assumes you have attributes called year and month and nothing that is just the YTD element name which would make it simpler.  Have slimmed this down from my 9 dim cube and Pafe went mad and put in lots of brackets which I've removed.  Hopefully have not left any syntax errors and you see what I'm trying to do and can make it work.

    I know there is 'parameterized MDX' on the pipeline, was hoping it would deliver this functionality to prevent these two workarounds. 

    Would be good to get an answer from IBM.

    ------------------------------
    James McCarthy
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: Synchronization in a more sophisticated way

    Posted Fri February 25, 2022 01:05 PM
    I am glad to see this is getting more visibility. I sent IBM a design document on this exact feature 5 years ago.

    ------------------------------
    Ryan Clapp
    ------------------------------



  • 6.  RE: Synchronization in a more sophisticated way

    Posted Sat February 26, 2022 05:29 AM
    Hi Wim

    This is a perennial problem in PAW. The only possible work around I have seen is to synchronise to different named hierarchies of the Period dimension. I uploaded a Period generator that will generate Named hierarchies such as YTD if you don't already have this.

    As you have said another approach is a cube based solution with a client dimension to allow different users to look at different periods, so they select a period, some rules generate the related YTD and Full Year and this is then referenced in MDX subsets that use TM1UserName to get the settings for the user. However, it is a cumbersome solution. It still means that there has to be one place where the user changes their selection rather than being able to change it on any view. 

    Other possibilities are to use a web sheet to DBS the selection into a cube when it is changed in a SUBNM but that means that you need websheets for selections on every PAW sheet, which then gets to the question of why don't we all continue using TM1 Web.

    There are several IBM Idea requests asking for a better approach to synchronisation. However, I have not heard any proposals to address this. It seems that there must be the ability to sync to a cell or variable rather than handling everything at the dimension level.

    Regards

    Paul Simon

    ------------------------------
    Paul Simon
    ------------------------------



  • 7.  RE: Synchronization in a more sophisticated way

    Posted Mon February 28, 2022 01:25 PM

    Hi Wim

    I raised an IBM Idea on this and ...

    IBM Idea PAOC-I-777


    Stuart King responded to idea Need programmatic control over synchronization

    Stuart King 9:41am

    Synchronization groups that allow the book author to pick and choose which widgets in the book will be synchronized with each other is in scope for the 2022 Planning Analytics roadmap.

    We will introduce groups of widgets that can be synchronized first. Directionality of synchronization between widgets or groups of widgets will be an additional enhancement. Between sync groups and directionality it should be possible to build some of the functionality described in this idea.




    ------------------------------
    Paul Simon
    ------------------------------



  • 8.  RE: Synchronization in a more sophisticated way

    Posted Tue March 01, 2022 03:54 AM
    Hi Paul,

    On the face of it I don't see how Stuart's response will solve Wim's specific issue, or the related issues highlighted in the other ideas that were put forward? If it does it would be nice to have a hint as to how this would work.

    It is good that synchronization is being enhanced but I don't see how further control over widgets equates to programmatic control over selected dimension members. It might make the workarounds less cumbersome though.


    My scepticism comes from a few previous issues, for example, where seeing the Item Reject message is only available to Admin users in PAW.
    IBM's initial plan to address this involves allowing developers to add in specific messages if a process runs successfully or not, for example, the "Sales Cube was not updated due to issues"

    But this is not addressing the problem, you want the user to know exactly why the process errored with the very specific message inserted into the TI process!

    regards,

    Mark

    ------------------------------
    Mark Wragg
    ------------------------------