Defining Aggregate Rules for a semi additive measure -RQP-DEF-0564

[ratnalein]

Hallo everyone,

I think, this question must be already present in the past, unfortunately I can not find it in the search engine:

I was trying to define an aggregate rule for my measure over the time dimension, the rule should be 'average':

RQP-DEF-0564 Unable to determine fact grain of semi-additive dimension '[Dimensions].[Date]' for measure '[Dimensions].[Resource Demand Supply Metrics with Skill (Monthly)].[Total Demand]'. Verify that a relationship is defined between the underlying query subjects from which the dimensions are constructed.

What is the solution for this problem?

Thank you for you help.

Regards,

Ratna

[ratnalein]

in the documentation, it is stated:

If a relationship does not exist, running a query that contains the measure Closing inventory generates the following error:

RQP-DEF-0564 Unable to determine fact grain of semi-additive dimension '[Dimensional view].[Time dimension]' for measure '[Dimensional view].[Inventory].[Closing inventory]'. Verify that a relationship is defined between the underlying query subjects from which the dimensions are constructed.

Semi-additive measures are not supported for sparse data. Sparse data is multidimensional data in which many of the combinations of dimension values do not have related fact data.

I assume, my date is not a sparse data. 

[blom0344]

Did you set determinant(s) for time dimension query subject?  I assume you properly joined fact and dimension query subjects..

[ratnalein]

Hallo blom0344,

I dont have any determinants.
I did properly joined the fact and dimension query subject.  In fact, the problem occured if I set this aggregate rules to 'average'.  Before I changed, I could normally create reports in report studio and query studio.

I am asking myself, if it is because of my snow flake schemata?

Thank you..

Regards,

Ratna

[blom0344]

If the dimension is joined directly to the fact, then you use a starschema.. And why do you not set determinants in the first place?

[ratnalein]

Hallo blom0344,

the dimension is joined directly to the fact, but under the dimension there are still other dimension query subjects, so it is definitely not a star schema. 

Regarding determinants, I am not sure if I need it.  I am curious, if determinant is a must to use aggregate rules?

Thank you.

Regards,

Ratna

[blom0344]

Okay, let's try another approach.
If you do not use an item from another query subject than the fact and a directly related dimension, then how would Cognos know a snowflake pattern is used in the first place? And why would it matter? Sometimes it is just a matter of elimination:


- copy model, throw out everything but fact and time dimension  --> test
- copy model, add unique determinant on the time dimension query subject --> test


Just some things that may shed a light  ;)

[ratnalein]

Hallo blom0034,

thanks for the idea.  I will test..

Regards,

Ratna