I'm looking for a way to sort a group by the difference of it's sub Groups
For example, Ticket is a group, Week is a group under ticket,
Ticket A : Total 100 Tickets, Difference 10 tickets
Week 1 : 55 Tickets
Week 2 : 45 Tickets
Ticket B : Total 100 Tickets, Difference 30 tickets
Week 1 : 65 Tickets
Week 2 : 35 Tickets
Ticket C : Total 150 Tickets, Difference 70 tickets
Week 1 : 110 Tickets
Week 2 : 40 Tickets
So basically, I want to determine the difference between the 2 groups, then sort by that. I can create the formula simple enough, but it won't let me sort by it. Any ideas
Do you have direct access to the database? For example, if this is a SQL database, I would create a stored procedure that creates the calculations for each group. Then when you add the stored procedure to the report you could easily sort them.
Some functionality is easier to produce on the db side instead of Crystal.
Related
I'm trying to calculate the sales target achievable possibilities in given month.
E.g. If the sales target is 72 units per month, how can we add the formula in google sheets in percentage?
Monthly Sales Target = 72
Units sold so far = 41
Remaining days = 10 (of the month)
How to make the calculation or the formula for 31 (i.e. 72-41)) units needs to be achieved in remaining 10 days? (What is percentage of possibility of we can reach the target within 10 days?)
see:
=IF((B7/B10)*100>100, 100, (B7/B10)*100)
I was wondering if Cognos Framework Manager has the built-in function "Last" like in Dynamic Cubes?
Or does someone know how to model following case:
We have two dimensions - a time dimension with year, half-year, quarter and month and another dimension that categorises people depending how long they are attending a project (1-30 days, 31-60 d, 60-180, 180 -365, 1-2 years, +2 years). However the choice of the time dimension level (year, half-year etc.) influences the categorization of the other dimension).
An example:
A person attends a project starting from 15.11.2018 and ends 30.06.2020. The cognos user uses for the time dimension the year level thus 2018, 2019 & 2018 will be displayed.
For 2018 the person will be in the category 31-60 days, since 46 days have passed until 31.12.2018. For 2019 the person will be listed in category 1-2 years as 46 + 365 days will have been passed since 31.12.2019. For 2020 the person will also be in that category as 46 + 365 + 180 day have gone by.
The categories will change if the user selects another time dimension level e.g. half-years:
2nd HY 2018: 31-60 (46 days passed)
1st HY 2019: 180-365 days (46 + 180 --> End of HY2019)
2nd HY 2019: 1-2 years (46 + 180 + 180)
1st HY 2020: 1-2 years (46 + 180 + 180 + 180)
Does someone know how to model dynamic dimension categories based on selection of another dimension (here time dimension)?
The fact table contains monthly data and for the mentioned peroson above there will be 20 seperate records (for each month between november 2018 and june 2020).
For any period, a person may or may not be working on a project.
Without knowing exactly what your data and metadata is it would be somewhat difficult to prescribe an exact solution but the approach would probably be somewhat similar to a degenerate dimension scenario.
You would want to model the project dimension as a fact as well as a dimension. You would have relationships between it and time and whatever other dimensions you need.
Depending on the data and the metadata you might need to do some gymnastics to get there.
If the data was in a form similar to this it would be not too difficult. This is an example to get you an idea about some ways of approaching the problem.
Date_Key Person_Key Project_Key commitment_status, which would be the measure.
20200101 1 1 1
20200101 1 2 0
20200101 1 3 0
20200102 1 1 1
20200102 1 2 0
20200102 1 3 0
20200103 1 1 0
20200103 1 2 1
20200103 1 3 0
In the above, person 1 was working on project 1 for 2 days and then put onto project 2 for a day. By aggregating the commitment status, which is done by setting the aggregate rule property, you would be able to determine the number of days a person has been working on a project no matter what time period you have set in your query.
When comparing two objects of the same size, Javers compares 1-to-1. However, if a new change is added such as new row to one of the objects, the comparison reports changes that are NOT changes. Is it possible to have Javers ignore the addition/deletion for the sake of just comparing like objects?
Basically the indices get out of sync.
Row Name Age Phone(Cell/Work)
1 Jo 20 123
2 Sam 25 133
3 Rick 30 152
4 Rick 30 145
New List
Row Name Age Phone(Cell/Work)
1 Jo 20 123
2 Sam 25 133
3 Bill 30 170
4 Rick 30 152
5 Rick 30 145
Because Bill is added the new comparison result will say that Rows 4,5 have changed when they actually didn't.
Thanks.
I'm guessing that your 'rows' are objects representing rows in an excel table and that you have mapped them as ValueObjects and put them into some list.
Since ValueObjects don't have its own identity, it's unclear, even for a human, what was the actual change. Take a look at your row 4:
Row Name Age Phone(Cell/Work)
before:
4 Rick 30 145
after:
4 Rick 30 152
Did you changed Phone at row 4 from 145 to 152? Or maybe you inserted a new data to row 4? How can we know?
We can't. By default, JaVers chooses the simplest answer, so reports value change at index 4.
If you don't care aboute the indices, you can change the list comparision algorithm from Simple to Levenshtein distance. See https://javers.org/documentation/diff-configuration/#list-algorithms
SIMPLE algorithm generates changes for shifted elements (in case when elements are inserted or removed in the middle of a list). On the contrary, Levenshtein algorithm calculates short and clear change list even in case when elements are shifted. It doesn’t care about index changes for shifted elements.
But, I'm not sure if Levenshtein is implemented for ValueObjects, if it is not implemented yet, it's a feature request to javers-core.
I have three columns in a SSRS table which record telephony data
Row 1 is Calls Offered which is a straight count
Row 2 is Calls Answered is as above
Row 3 is a Service Level Percentage of Calls Answered/Calls Offered
This table spans for 9 months and then there is a total column at the end
Row 1 and Row 2 are easy enough because it's just a grand total but for Row 3
I need to do a weighted average for all the percentages across the 9 months
So how can I do a SUMPRODUCT which will give me the weighted average service level over 9 months
In Excel my formula is as follows: =SUMPRODUCT(E10:M10,E$8:M$8)/SUM(E$8:M$8)
So Row 8 is my calls offered and Row 10 being my percentages - how do I replicate this in SSRS?
Thanks
Dan
I've worked out if anyone is interested it was
=(Sum(Fields!Calls_Answered.Value)/Sum(Fields!Calls_Offered.Value)) * Sum(Fields!Calls_Offered.Value)/Sum(Fields!Calls_Offered.Value)
So it has to do the calculation of the service level percentage first then times that against the amount of calls offered and then divide it against the amount of Calls Offered
Thanks
Dan
Based on GoodData's excellent suggestion for implementing Fact tables, I have been able to design a model that meets our client’s requirements for joining different attributes across different tables. The issue I have now is that the model metrics are highly denormalized, with data repeating itself. I am currently trying to figure out a way to dedupe results.
For example, I have two tables—the first is a NAMES table and the second is my fact table:
NAMES
Val2 Name
35 John
36 Bill
37 Sally
FACT
VAL1 VAL2 SCORE COURSEGRADE
1 35 50 90%
2 35 50 80%
3 35 50 60%
4 36 10 75%
5 37 40 95%
What I am trying to do is write a metric in such a way so that we can get an average of SCORE that eliminates the duplicate value. GoodData is excellent in that it can actually give me back the unique results using the COUNT(VARIABLE1,RECORD) metric, but I can’t seem to get the average store to stick when eliminating the breakout information. If I keep all fields (including the VAL2), it shows me everything:
VAL2 SCORE(AVG)
35 50
36 10
37 40
AVG: 33.33
But when I remove VAL2, I suddenly lose the "uniqueness" of the record.
SCORE(AVG)
40
What I want is the score of 33.33 we got above.
I’ve tried using a BY statement in my SELECT AVG(SCORE), but this doesn’t seem to work. It’s almost like I need some kind of DISTINCT clause. Any thoughts on how to get that rollup value shown in my first example above?
Happy to help here. I would try the following:
Create an intermediate metric (let's call it Score by Employee):
SELECT MIN( SCORE ) BY ID ALL IN ALL OTHER DIMENSIONS
Then, once you have this metric defined you should be able to create a metric for the average score as follows:
SELECT AVG( Score by Employee )
The reason we create the first metric is to force the table to normalize score around the ID attribute which gets rid of duplicates when we use this in the next metric (we could have used MAX or AVG also, it doesn't matter).
Hopefully this solves your issue, let me know if it doesn't work and I'll be happy to help out more. Also feel free to check out GoodData's Developer Portal for more information about reporting:
https://developer.gooddata.com/docs/reporting
Best,
JT
you should definitively check "How to build a metric in a metric" presentation, made by Petr Olmer (http://www.slideshare.net/petrolmer/in10-how-to-build-a-metric-in-a-metric).
It can help you to understand it better.
Cheers,
Peter