Archive

Archive for May, 2014

MDX #41–Remove employees with less than $100,000 sales

May 30, 2014 Leave a comment

Table of contents

Need to remove employees who have zero sales amount
Create a calculated measure with the IIF() function
The NON EMPTY keyword will take care of the removal
Ordering results with both numeric and string expression
IIF() statement VS. Scope() statement in MDX Cookbook 2012

Need to remove employees who have zero sales amount

I recently helped a co-worker with a simple MDX query. All she wanted to do is to remove employees from the return set who has no sales or who has zero $ sales. She was using the NON EMPTY keyword on both the X and Y axis. That removed employees who have no sales, but the employees who have zero sales amount are still showing in the data set.

A quick and simple way to remove those employees with zero sales amount is to create a calculated measure in the query. This new calculated measure will simply use the IIF function to turn the sales amount into a NULL value, when the sales amount is zero. The NON EMPTY keyword on the Y axis will automatically take care of the removal of those employees with zero sales amount.

Create a calculated measure with the IIF() function

Suppose that this is our initial MDX query, where all employees (at leaf level of the Employees hierarchy) who have sales are returned.

 

image

Now you would like to only see employees who have more than $100,000 sales. In the following modified MDX query, I added this calculated measure. 

[Measures].[Reseller Sales Amount > 100,000]

This measure is simply identical to [Measures].[Reseller Sales Amount], except that it is set by the IIF function to be NULL, when it is less than 100,000.

The NON EMPTY keyword will take care of the removal

The NON EMPTY keyword on the Y axis will automatically take care of the removal of those employees with sales less than 100,000.

 

image

Ordering results with both numeric and string expression

To be sure that we get only the employee who have more than 100,00 sales amount, we can sort the results by the sales amount using the order() function with this numeric expression.

[Measures].[Reseller Sales Amount > 100,000]

 

image

 

If you insist to sort the results by the employees’ name, use the employee names as a string expression in the order() function.

[Measures].[Employee name]

 

image

IIF() statement VS. Scope() statement in MDX Cookbook 2012

In the book MDX Cookbook 2012, we have quite extensive examples on how to use the query-based IIF() statement, as well as the the cube-based Scope() statement.

You can check out the recipe Detecting a particular member of a hierarchy while you are using the book.

Categories: MDX Challenges Tags: , ,

SSRS #74 – 2008 Cascading bug when you have a middle parameter

May 9, 2014 2 comments

Some SSRS reports have a large number of parameters

I recently had a chance to help a co-worker to modify an existing SSRS+Cube report. The first thing that caught my eye is the large number of parameters in the report.

Although I never really developed any reports that have more than, let’s say, 6 parameters, I can understand why developers sometimes need to use, let’s say more than 20 parameters. This happened most likely because, the report developer is lack of authority to re-design the cube, or because the report has unnecessarily complex design. Another possibility is that the developer had made conscious decision to avoid writing MDX queries and shifting the coding to the Reporting Services.

A bug in SSRS 2008

Here is a scenario where developers sometimes might need to resolve to using a hidden parameter, that sits in the middle of two parameters. In the diagram below, the middle parameter will take the user input from parameter 1, and have some IIF statement to transform the input, and then the dynamically set value will be the input for the dataset 3 which feeds parameters 3.

clip_image002

I’ve tested this type of "cascading" parameters (with a middle parameter that has a dynamically set default value). The short conclusion is this: in SSRS 2008, the parameter 3 failed to reflect user’s section in parameters 1; in SSRS 2012, all is good.

So I had to say that this is a bug in SSRS 2008.

Remove the middle parameter to work around the bug

To work around the bug, fortunately, we have a pretty simple solution. Simply remove the middle parameters, AND then code the IIF logic in the query parameter for dataset 3 (which feeds parameter 3).

clip_image004

The only drawback I can see in this workaround is that if the transformation logic needs to be used for another dataset, then you have no choice by repeating it.

Longer version of the solution

The following is the longer version of the solution.

My Original Suggestion
  • Use a middle parameter to do the transformation, with nested IIF statement in both Available Values and Default Values.
  • Then pass the middle parameter to the cascading dataset; the middle parameter is passed directly to the dataset without the IIF statement.
  • The solution failed in SSRS 2008: the cascading dataset DataSet_Employees would never get refreshed even when the middle parameter is refreshed correctly when ever a new Department is selected by the user.
  • Reason for the failure: it might have to do with how the value for the middle parameter is set programmatically with the nested IIF statement, rather than by user selection.
  • Good news: this solution worked in SSRS 2012 in my test.

Here are two screen shots from our failed solution.

clip_image006

clip_image008

New Solution That Worked
  • Remove the middle parameter entirely.
  • Pass the parameter Departments to the cascading dataset, DataSet_Employees, instead of the middle parameter.
  • The Departments parameter needs to be modified to perform the transformation; use the same nested IIF statement we used in the middle parameter.
  • Voila. It works.
  • Reason for the success: by removing the middle parameter and coding the nested IIF in the parameter that is passed to the cascading dataset, Reporting Services made no mistake, but had to refresh the cascading dataset based on the user selection.

Here are a few screen shots from our successful solution.

clip_image010

The nested IIF statement is now coded in the parameter expression.

clip_image012

%d bloggers like this: