Hi all,

I am facing this error when I join two Dimension tables with one Fact table in 'Custom Reports'. And when i drag a column from dimension table then it throws this error (at this stage fact and dimension table fields are logically seen as the field of single table across 'dimension and measures' in custom report).


Join Type : Inner
Instance : Multiple (one to many)

Can anyone plz help me out.

Please also advise on below point :
Is it a product limitation, because we cannot keep specifying or explaining each user about the concepts of joins or Fact & Dimensions(alike a technical person who can understand the concepts). I feel then reporting object, being an alternative approach, is better from user point of view?


Thanks!

Sagar

This message has been edited. Last edited by: SSB26,

Hi Sagar,

In terms of the error - if this is truly a fact table/dimension table relationship, then you probably need to change the joins to not be one-to-many joins, which is the default. If they are one-to-one joins, then you shouldn't get this error.

In terms of allowing non-technical users to create their own reports - I think these complexities should be pre-defined in the metadata layer.

There are probably many ways to do this. I generally use a combination of the following three approaches:
1) As you mentioned, creating Reporting Objects which they can use
-or
2) Create a "guided adhoc" report
-or-
3) Spend the time setting up the synonyms (master files/access files) to be more "user friendly". Have you considered this? i.e. pre-defining the "joins" in the master files?

For the latter, you can set up the joins, create hierarchies for your dimensions, create virtual fields, change the titles, add field and file descriptions etc. Definitely worth the effort in the long run.

quote:

a product limitation

Never! Not in WebFOCUS!

Thanks Twanette for your Reply!
Your points really give me new approach.

One-to-one relationship did make a sense. I tried it and yes it really worked fine.

And I will try for your third approach but it seems to me alike what we do in reporting objects too. Pre-defining everything is better idea when looking from user point of view.

Thanks Again!

Sagar