none
Display item based on relation with another RRS feed

  • Question

  • We have a requirement where based on the user selecting one item, they want to be able to see related items. Currently the only way I can see doing this is by having a secondary item table that is used as the filter, are there any other improved ways of achieving this process?

    In our case, it's around item supersession so Item1 from 2016 is replaced by Item2 from 2017 and Item2 replaced by Item3 in 2018, if the user selects Item3, they want to see the various measures that includes Item1 and Item2 (as their own rows rather than one measure incorporating all three items)

    Thanks


    EDIT: of most interest would be is it possible to do it from one visible item dimension? That is, they select item3 from the item dimension and all other related items will be displayed (with possibly a selector deciding whether to show history items or not)
    • Edited by RyanAB Wednesday, March 7, 2018 1:09 AM
    Wednesday, March 7, 2018 1:03 AM

Answers

  • Consider adding a grouping column/attribute, which in your example would have the same value for items 1 to 3. Ideally these grouping values will allow the users to understand, which items they group, without having to see the names of the actual items.

    Neither MD nor tabular can be set up in such a way that, after the user has filtered on a specific item, the engine adds other members to that filter, so you'll need to add another column/attribute anyway.


    Expect me to help you solve your problems, not to solve your problems for you.

    • Marked as answer by RyanAB Thursday, March 8, 2018 6:33 PM
    Wednesday, March 7, 2018 8:18 AM

All replies

  • Hi RyanAB,

    Thanks for your question.

    Are you using Multidimensional or Tabular?

    To solve your question more efficiently, would you mind typing out 5-10 rows of example data for these table, then showing what results you are expecting based on those sample data? Do mask sensitive data before uploading.

    Best Regards
    Willson Yuan
    MSDN Community Support
    Please remember to click "Mark as Answer" the responses that resolved your issue, and to click "Unmark as Answer" if not. This can be beneficial to other community members reading this thread. If you have any compliments or complaints to MSDN Support, feel free to contact MSDNFSF@microsoft.com

    Wednesday, March 7, 2018 6:30 AM
    Moderator
  • 1. The Items list is the source list and the Orders list is the target list.

    2. Each list has unique columns to ensure that the correct data is matched.

    3. The primary lookup column in the source list "looks up" the Order ID column in the target list based on a matching value.

    4. A secondary lookup column in the source list automatically inserts the Orders Description column from the target list.

    Wednesday, March 7, 2018 6:44 AM
  • Consider adding a grouping column/attribute, which in your example would have the same value for items 1 to 3. Ideally these grouping values will allow the users to understand, which items they group, without having to see the names of the actual items.

    Neither MD nor tabular can be set up in such a way that, after the user has filtered on a specific item, the engine adds other members to that filter, so you'll need to add another column/attribute anyway.


    Expect me to help you solve your problems, not to solve your problems for you.

    • Marked as answer by RyanAB Thursday, March 8, 2018 6:33 PM
    Wednesday, March 7, 2018 8:18 AM
  • Consider adding a grouping column/attribute, which in your example would have the same value for items 1 to 3. Ideally these grouping values will allow the users to understand, which items they group, without having to see the names of the actual items.

    Neither MD nor tabular can be set up in such a way that, after the user has filtered on a specific item, the engine adds other members to that filter, so you'll need to add another column/attribute anyway.


    Expect me to help you solve your problems, not to solve your problems for you.


    Yes, that is what I figured but never having used the likes of calculatetable, summarize etc, I wasn't sure any of them could do what I wanted
    Thursday, March 8, 2018 6:35 PM
  • At maximum you'll be able to calculate and show, against just the selected item, an aggregate metric for that item and all its related items. Once again, it is not possible to unfilter an item in the process of calculating measures for another item.

    You could do a composite measure that will return, e.g. for Item3, combined value and description, as a text, "42 (total metric for Item3, Item1, Item2)", but a grouping field does seem a superior approach.


    Expect me to help you solve your problems, not to solve your problems for you.

    Friday, March 9, 2018 1:24 PM