If you are unable to create a new account, please email support@bspsoftware.com

 

News:

MetaManager - Administrative Tools for IBM Cognos
Pricing starting at $2,100
Download Now    Learn More

Main Menu

Filter to exclude descendants in Cube

Started by MuKiZi0, 01 Feb 2016 04:06:17 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

MuKiZi0

Hellow everyone!!,

I would like to show everything of year 2016 except day 2016 01 02. see attachment for the tree.

Need to use the filter function? of except? and how does it look like?

gr
Em


MFGF

Quote from: MuKiZi0 on 01 Feb 2016 04:06:17 AM
Hellow everyone!!,

I would like to show everything of year 2016 except day 2016 01 02. see attachment for the tree.

Need to use the filter function? of except? and how does it look like?

gr
Em

How about:

except(descendants([2016],[your Day level],self beforewithmember),[2016 01 02])

MF.
Meep!

MuKiZi0

Thanks for ur reply MF.

I made thise one and it works fine :-):
except(descendants ([2016];3); [20160102])

But, can i show the output on the year level, as in attachedment? first is how it looks now, 2nd is the one i need.

hopefully u know how to do that .

many thanks

gr
Em

MFGF

Quote from: MuKiZi0 on 01 Feb 2016 07:37:51 AM
Thanks for ur reply MF.

I made thise one and it works fine :-):
except(descendants ([2016];3); [20160102])

But, can i show the output on the year level, as in attachedment? first is how it looks now, 2nd is the one i need.

hopefully u know how to do that .

many thanks

gr
Em

Hi,

You originally asked to see everything for 2016 except for one day - that's what the expression we gave you does. If you had said initially that you wanted only a summary for 2016 with the measure value for one day member excluded, we would have given you a different answer. It really pays to be specific when you ask for help :)

Try replacing your expression with:

[2016] - [20160102]

Cheers!

MF.
Meep!

MuKiZi0

Thanks for ur answers MF.
yes iam sorry for the additional question. The 1 answers was really good and also using it. but these was an extra question. Next time i will make a new topic.
Many thanks, really.

gr
Em

Michael75

<schoolma'am hat on>

De bedoeling was... excuseer... what MF was saying was not that you should have started a second post for your '2016 grouped' question. It was more that you should have expressed this as part of your original request, because apparently it belonged there.

Much easier said than done, I know...

Mvg