5 Replies Latest reply: Sep 22, 2011 1:12 PM by Sumant RSS

    Non unique nodes at different level in hierarchy

    Sumant
      We have Dimension 'D' with hierarchy 'D' with 3 level as follows
      CT -> CG -> PN
      CT being the top most node in the tree
      Issue we have is, we have same value at CT and CG
      as
      C1 -> G1 -> PN1
      and
      G1 -> G2 -> PN2
      Is there a way IOP could handle such case without changing the values for one of the nodes ?

      we tried adding namespace for CG Level, ${CT} as a Name Space and
      at PN level namespace as ${CT}#${CG}, however

      for PN1 and G2 parent remains the same as D/D/G1 and which creates a confusions.

      Any solution for this?
        • 1. Re: Non unique nodes at different level in hierarchy
          828580
          Could you please try the following -

          CT->CG->PN



          CT

          Namespace -> {CT}

          Parent -> {CT}



          CG

          Namespace -> {CT}

          Parent -> D/{CT}



          PN

          Namespace -> {CT}

          Parent -> D/{CT}/{PN}
          • 2. Re: Non unique nodes at different level in hierarchy
            Sumant
            Nothing worked...We added some extra characters before CG's name to solve the confusion.

            Thanks,
            Sumant
            • 3. Re: Non unique nodes at different level in hierarchy
              Lokesh Rathi
              hi Sumant,

              1 option :
              You can try the above suggestion of namespace. Instead of taking hardcoded value as namespace ,Use the column as name space. for ex.

              A
              B
              C
              D are four columns in Data source and A,B,C are going to use in Dimension levels.

              then you can create use B column as namespace for C and A column for B. But then In MDX query you have to provide namespace for Dimension members. Its working for us.

              2 option :

              you can concatenate the dimension levels with prefix or suffix. Take a look of IMP model Fiscal Calendar(Time) dimension stagemap.

              3 option:
              Concatenate in Data itself and it seems you are using this only.

              --Lokesh                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
              • 4. Re: Non unique nodes at different level in hierarchy
                762759
                Please use external ETL mechanisms to make the names unique. Dont use namespace. It is not recommended because there are limitations at cube to cube mapping and rowsoruce mapping, etc. You will run into issues in other places.

                In general, try to make names unique before feeding to IOP
                • 5. Re: Non unique nodes at different level in hierarchy
                  Sumant
                  Thanks....
                  Yes you are very true...after many trial and error...we also came to the same conclusion.
                  We implemented the solution by adding prefix to the data coming at 2nd level and which made the data different.

                  Regards,
                  Sumant