Skip to main content
J
johnal67
October 22, 2024
Solved

Composite transformation rule with Scenario

  • October 22, 2024
  • 5 replies
  • 1 view

I'm trying to do a Composite Rule to Bypass an account if it's part of a specific Scenario?  Can you use Scenario as part of an Account Composite Rule?  This is my statement "A#[525300]:S#[Budget_Dist]" that isn't working.

    Best answer by T_Kress

    If your scenario dimension at the data source level is defined from "Global Data Key Scenario" or "Current Data Key Scenario" (the latter is most typical), then it likely will not work in a composite map rule.  If instead the scenario is a column or field in the data source, then that composite should work.  I would first check how scenario is defined at the data source level.

    If scenario is a field in the data source then an alternative to a composite rule is you can concatenate Account_Scenario in your account dimension.  Then via mask or 1:1 mappings, you can handle account mappings. 

    5 replies

    M
    MarcusH
    October 22, 2024

    You can use the Scenario as part of a composite rule - it works for me in V7.4.

    I
    Ioana
    October 22, 2024

    Hi, 

    Is the account group placed after the scenario group in the transformation profile? See below an example, Scenarios are placed before Account rules in the profile: 

    Ioana_0-1729586826170.png

    Thanks,

    Ioana

    M
    MarcusH
    October 22, 2024

    The order of the dimensions in the Transformation Profile does not control the order in which the dimensions are processed. That is controlled by the Transformation Sequence for the dimension (Application | Cubes | Integration). The Transformation Profile controls the order in which the Transformation Groups are processed within a dimension. If you only have 1 transformation group per dimension, the Transformation Profile has no impact on the processing order. And the Scenario dimension does not have a Transformation Sequence as the the Integration tab is split by Scenario Type.

    T
    T_KressAnswer
    October 22, 2024

    If your scenario dimension at the data source level is defined from "Global Data Key Scenario" or "Current Data Key Scenario" (the latter is most typical), then it likely will not work in a composite map rule.  If instead the scenario is a column or field in the data source, then that composite should work.  I would first check how scenario is defined at the data source level.

    If scenario is a field in the data source then an alternative to a composite rule is you can concatenate Account_Scenario in your account dimension.  Then via mask or 1:1 mappings, you can handle account mappings. 

    J
    johnal67Author
    October 22, 2024

    You are my hero!  I was about to go crazy on that!  Thank you that was exactly what my issue was, I just had to make it a stored value on my Data Source which is okay for this situation, and it made the composite rule work. 

    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement