Comparison of 3 preset scenario, but changeable by the user using pager

Hi everyone,

Main Request : I need to do in Board something looking like this :

1st pager must change impact selection of the first column, 2nd pager on the second column and 3rd pager on the third column. Do note that all 3 pagers are based on the same operational dimension : Scenario.

I have a hard time figuring out how to do that and I'm hitting many limitation of Board on these attempts :

Interactive selection + Apply Selection to Block : Doesn't solve the issue as I don't have the possibility to add 3 pager on the same dimension
Best idea so far : Duplicating my cube 2x times, replacing with a different "manually" replicated scenario dimension in each cube. It should allow me to have 3 pagers on the page and work well in the the dataviw two. However, it's a lot of work to ensure data synchronization and a lot of memory usage and disk space for only a display feature.

If you have any idea or opinion on the matter I'm very interested!

impossible request : Also user wanted to be able to reset default value for pager 1 & 2 when I change the value in 3rd one. For exemple, when you set 3rd pager to 2018 RF4, pager 2 is should reset to 2018 RF3 (your previous forecast) and pager 2 should reset to 2017 RF4 that is 1 year previous.

Side Rant : I literally can stand Pager anymore in Board There so much limitation and so many bugs. Can we have a complete overhaul of them even if it breaks backward compatibility?

Find more posts tagged with

Accepted answers

All comments

Björn Reuber

Hi,

does it must be a Pager? can it also be a Procedure with a Popup Window? Cause than you can do this pretty easy with Apply Selection to Layout Block, cause this feature is exactly made for requests like yours (having different selection in different blocks of a layout)

Regards

Björn

Björn Reuber

Hi,

between my first reply and now, I thought there must be a different solution, without replicating the source cube (and to use pagers).

So I need 3 additional Entities (ScenA, ScenB, ScenC) and 3 Cubes on Scen&ScenA,Scen&ScenB,Scen&ScenC (which are only Matrix cubes, so pretty small and can be calculated if a new Scenario is created).

Than I created a more or less complex layout (no entity in by column, for all Blocks (except the Blocks I added to make it better readable) I used Scen in DetailBy

Regards

Björn

Nicolas CHIGROS

Hi!

Can't really use interactive selection + Apply to Layout Block :

because it isn't user friendly : multiple selection is possible and
it would be a hell of procedures as I have many screens that may use this model
Poor opening performance when opening the screen and really hard maintenance looking forward.

A cool idea that would solve my issue would be to be able to have a different type of pagers where the member value is stored in a variable instead of the page selection. Then you would used that variable in the reference of your block instead of an actual member. A bit i'm tired of posting idea to get only a few votes for now, but I may post it later.

Regards,

Nicolas

Nicolas CHIGROS

That actually a cool solution, it maybe worth of an inspiration on the site.

Sadly, I've looked into it a bit and I'm not sure I can make it work in my case as the "val" block would be split into many block due to other constraint. I've simplify my use case in this post. I would look into it a bit more however see if I can think of something.

I also though of using RDMS cubes, to simplify the storage and replication of the data : 1 based on an actual table, 2 based on views. We have the option available but we don't use it yet and don't have setup any rdms.

By the way, I couldn't find any entry for "Replicated entities" in the http://help.board.com so I don't really know if I'm missing something or if this features is limited to 1 replication per tree.

Thank you,

Nicolas

Björn Reuber

Hi,

about Replicated Trees, yes it is limited to one replication per tree.

About rolap, should also be possible, but consider the performance (in some cases the ODBC is an bottleneck).

About the solution, as you can see from the timestamps of the posts the "design process" was very fast, so only following the given constraint, but I think also with more constraints there shoulde be a feasible soltuion.

regards

Björn