Fine tuning Set-Trigger on DataView

Peter van Bennekom

We have a dataview with (for simplicity sake) 3 blocks in the layout. Each block has data entry enabled. Dataview has set-trigger defined - this procedure is executing some logic/flows with the new numbers. The logic in the procedure is assuming the that all 3 blocks have changed and logic needs to be executed for those changes.

 

If I understand this mechanism correctly this trigger is calling the procedure THREE times - once for each row.

 

Suppose user changes row 1 block 1, row 2 block 2, and row 2 block 3. In this case the procedure will be called two times (row 1 and 2). For the call to row 1 I only want to deal with the changed number in block 1 - I don't want to execute the logic for the 2 blocks not changed. For row 2 I only want to execute logic for block 2 and 3.

 

Given the fact the trigger works on rows:

• Is there a way in my procedure to figure out if a block value has changed? So i can bypass (performance) executing logic for numbers that have not changed.

or

• Is there a way to assign this Set-Trigger procedure to an entry enabled block? So this will only be called in case the block value has changed

Björn Reuber

Hi,

 

the DataEntry trigger is allways been executed within the Row/Col Selection.

so if you change your model from 3 Blocks/Cubes to one Cube having a certain Entity (which is in by Column) you should directly get the desired behavior.

 

Regards

Björn

Peter van Bennekom

Thanks Björn Reuber - I hear what you are saying but this is not really an option - user wants to modify data for 3 cubes in one dataview. We want to prevent unnecessary execution and i was hoping a mechanism would be there to check if a column was changed for this row...

Björn Reuber

Hi Peter,

 

don't understand your answer, for the end user it doesn't make any differences if he has 3 Cubes (and no by Col Entity) or one cube (and an Entity with 3 Elements in by Col). As long as you doesnt have a by Col Entity you would get the desired reuslt with a small change in your DataModel

 

Regard

Björn