Focal Point
Active Report Limitations

This topic can be found at:
https://forums.informationbuilders.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/7971057331/m/6321073492

August 05, 2008, 11:29 AM
<Jax>
Active Report Limitations
We have a rather elaborate matrix report with several rows printed OVER and ACROSS several periods (poor man's FML). The report appears correctly in EXL2K and HTML but does not even execute in AHTML. In fact, when querying the server the agent appears as idle.

This is WF 7.6.5 and a Tomcat server. We did open a case with IBI but we did want to pass this among the FOCUS nation to see if others had experienced this enigmatic situation. Also, I did an expansive search here in Focal Point and could not find anything so how much more we need your help here.
August 05, 2008, 11:50 AM
GinnyJakes
Since all the data for an Active Report is stored in the browser, there is a limit as to the number of rows that make sense to put in the report. You didn't happen to mention that fact. Also, I'm not sure OVER makes sense in that context.

Also, please update your profile signature with your product suite, release, and platform.

Thanks.


Ginny
---------------------------------
Prod: WF 7.7.01 Dev: WF 7.6.9-11
Admin, MRE,self-service; adapters: Teradata, DB2, Oracle, SQL Server, Essbase, ESRI, FlexEnable, Google
August 05, 2008, 03:34 PM
FrankDutch
I agree on Ginny's point OVER is not the common command I would expect in this context.
AHTML is preparing a kind of report with records you want to play with.
The over command puts different fields in different rows and in the same column.




Frank

prod: WF 7.6.10 platform Windows,
databases: msSQL2000, msSQL2005, RMS, Oracle, Sybase,IE7
test: WF 7.6.10 on the same platform and databases,IE7

August 06, 2008, 04:31 PM
<Jax>
The code has been modified to use &OVER, which is -SET &OVER = IF &WFRMT = AHTML THEN ' ' ELSE 'OVER;

That code works great for EXL2K and HTML but not for Active Reports. When selecting Active Reports the situation still prevails where the report starts but the server shows the agtent as idle. We did confirm that the &OVER code does work correctly by running SET XRETRIEVAL = OFF.

I'm not sure if this is germane to the issue but this are SQL Server tables.
August 07, 2008, 09:44 AM
GinnyJakes
How many rows are in the answer set/report?


Ginny
---------------------------------
Prod: WF 7.7.01 Dev: WF 7.6.9-11
Admin, MRE,self-service; adapters: Teradata, DB2, Oracle, SQL Server, Essbase, ESRI, FlexEnable, Google
August 07, 2008, 10:53 AM
j.gross
quote:
We did confirm that the &OVER code does work correctly by running SET XRETRIEVAL = OFF.


(Note that the displayed -SET statement has at least two errors. I presume the original was clean.)

So Dialog Manager is acting as expected when AHTML is selected, and the resolved TABLE request does not contain OVER.

If so, your problem is not with "OVER and Active Reports". Shift your focus.

Factor out your dialog manager (try running with &ECHO=ON, &STACK=OFF, and grab the generated pure Focus code from View Source), and play with the pure Focus code till you trap the fox.


- Jack Gross
WF through 8.1.05
August 07, 2008, 02:24 PM
GCohen
The 'OVER' is not the problem. In an AR it is just ignored and treated as if you said 'AND'.
Can you post the report so we can see what else it contains?


Release 7.6.9
Windows
HTML
August 07, 2008, 02:49 PM
GinnyJakes
I still want to know how many rows there are in the report. It may be that the agent is idle because all of the data has been retrieved. However, if there are too many rows, it may be that the page is taking too long to render. Does the browser window come up as blank?


Ginny
---------------------------------
Prod: WF 7.7.01 Dev: WF 7.6.9-11
Admin, MRE,self-service; adapters: Teradata, DB2, Oracle, SQL Server, Essbase, ESRI, FlexEnable, Google
August 28, 2008, 10:37 AM
<Jax>
There are 68 rows across 12 months + a summary column. We were running into a (FOC153) VERB OBJECTS TIMES RETRIEVED COLUMNS EXCEEDS MAXIMUM error so the report was rewritten as a compound report.

I will work up a sanitized version of the code because there are some customer confidentiality issues here.