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.
Will using RANKED BY LOWEST/HIGHEST to sort data always produce the same results as it would have using BY LOWEST/HIGHEST?
I recently inherited (many) FEX's from a former coworker. I am vaguely familiar with what RANKED BY does, but have rarely used it. My coworker, however, never used "BY LOWEST/HIGHEST" to sort within his FEXs, and instead always used RANKED BY LOWEST/HIGHEST to sort.
My inclination is this probably doesn't create any issues/still sorts the data ascending/descending. But, I want to be certain.
Thank you!This message has been edited. Last edited by: FP Mod Chuck,
According to this documentation, https://infocenter.information...urce%2FBY_TOTAL.htm, RANKED adds a column to the report in which a rank number is assigned to each aggregated sort value in the report output. If multiple rows have the same ranking, the rank number only appears in the first row.