As of December 1, 2020, Focal Point is retired and repurposed as a reference repository. We value the wealth of knowledge that's been shared here over the years. You'll continue to have access to this treasure trove of knowledge, for search purposes only.
Join the TIBCO Community TIBCO Community is a collaborative space for users to share knowledge and support one another in making the best use of TIBCO products and services. There are several TIBCO WebFOCUS resources in the community.
From the Home page, select Predict: WebFOCUS to view articles, questions, and trending articles.
Select Products from the top navigation bar, scroll, and then select the TIBCO WebFOCUS product page to view product overview, articles, and discussions.
Request access to the private WebFOCUS User Group (login required) to network with fellow members.
Former myibi community members should have received an email on 8/3/22 to activate their user accounts to join the community. Check your Spam folder for the email. Please get in touch with us at community@tibco.com for further assistance. Reference the community FAQ to learn more about the community.
our institution is using SungardHE Banner with ODS 3.1. recently we upgraded to the latest version of the ODS(3.1). when i recreated several MFDs in Developer Studio 5.3 and ran reports, the reports returned 0 rows. I replaced the MFD with the MFD in effect prior to the upgrade the report returns data. I did rewrite(totally) the report using the newly created MFD and it ran successfully. with many, many reports in production this is not an option. We are using WF 5.3.3 with Apache 2.0.48/Tomcat 4.1 on HPUX 11.0. does anyone have any thoughts on what may be causing this and how we get existing reports to recognize/utilize the newly created MFDs? thanks.
WF Developer Studio 7.6.5 Red Hat Linux 4.6 w/Apache 2.0.52/Tomcat 5.5.23 Formats: Excel, PDF, HTML
Posts: 3 | Location: Freeport, IL | Registered: March 05, 2007
Boy, Patti, that is a puzzler. I don't know anything about Sungard but since it is an upgraded ODS, it is possible that it is using a later version of whatever the underlying data base is? Have you tried going to the Web Console for WebFOCUS and checking the adapter? Have you tried re-creating the masters from the console instead of Dev. Studio.
And, finally, if the old masters work, why are you re-creating them?
Patti, have you compared the old and new masters? When we migrated from FOCUS for HP-UX (Unix) to WebFOCUS (Linux) we found that the master generator was treating fields diffently. For example, a field that was describe in Oracle as a NUMBER(5) was generated with an I5 format and I4 internal in FOCUS but the WebFocus generator defined the same field with a P6 format and P3 internal. That will cause problems with JOIN.
In FOCUS since 1985. Prod WF 8.0.08 (z90/Suse Linux) DB (Oracle 11g), Self Serv, Report Caster, WebServer Intel/Linux.
Posts: 975 | Location: Oklahoma City | Registered: October 27, 2006
Thanks for the responses. It is indeed related to MFD generation. Several of the fields in the warehouse have extremely long lengths. During synonym creation those fields are intrepreted as TX format with a truncated length of 50. I modifed those fields to A50 and the reports are working correctly. I am told that we will be much happier after moving to 7.x. I am hoping this problem will be resolved also.
WF Developer Studio 7.6.5 Red Hat Linux 4.6 w/Apache 2.0.52/Tomcat 5.5.23 Formats: Excel, PDF, HTML
Posts: 3 | Location: Freeport, IL | Registered: March 05, 2007
You will be happier after upgrading. Manually editing relational masters is not a good thing. If your ODS sits on top of SQL Server, you probably had to do quite a bit. We did. After upgrading and switching to the native SQL Server driver and 7.6, we didn't have to modify any.
However, I would suggest that you read the Data Adminstration manual for your platform and data source. There are lots of engine commands that you can put in your edasprof to control the way that synonyms are created. When you get to 7.6, you will most definitely want to look at the VARCHAR one.