MetaManager - Administrative Tools for IBM Cognos
Pricing starting at $2,100
Download Now Learn More
Quote from: FerdH4 on 10 Dec 2025 02:58:29 PMI'm working with v11.2.3 and getting unexpected results (result set) in a query with nine Detail Filters.
I've successfully tested each filter alone and get the correct result set each time. Even when 6, 7, or even 8 Filters are active, the result sets are correct.
But I get wrong result set when all nine Filters are active. Records which should not be excluded are being excluded even though they were not excluded in earlier tests with fewer than 9 Filters active.
I am using Minimum and Maximum expressions on separate fields in separate Filters. Quite literally, it looks like if I could control the other of the execution of one or specific Filters the results might be correct.
Is there anything that I can do inside of a single Query to influence the execution order of my Filters?
lag([Item to Report], 1, null for [Grouping Item] order by [Sorting Item])Quotelag ( member , index_expression )
Returns the sibling member that is "index_expression" number of positions prior to "member".
Example: lag ( [Tents] , 1 )
Result: Cooking Gear
Example: lag ( [Tents] , -2 )
Result: Packs
Quotecount ( [ all | distinct ] expression [ auto ] )
count ( [ all | distinct ] expression for [ all|any ] expression { , expression } )
count ( [ all | distinct ] expression for report )
Returns the number of selected data items excluding null values. Distinct is an alternative expression that is compatible with earlier versions of the product. All is supported in DQM mode only and it avoids the presumption of double counting a data item of a dimension table.
Example: count ( Sales )
Result: Returns the total number of entries under Sales.
Quotein the exact same wayas in the dataset, you would get exactly the same results.
Quote from: dougp on 09 Dec 2025 09:54:38 AMAfter rereading this, I think this is the symptom to focus on.
By any chance, does your date dimension have about 1300 rows? About 3.6 years? Of course, working with non-rounded numbers to begin with would help.
I think what you are meaning by N:N is not even that the date table and the fact have a many-to-many relationship. I think you're saying they have no relationship -- a cross join or cartesian join. So the result is a dataset with the number of rows being the number or rows from fact times the number of rows from the date dimension.
Creating a proper relationship between the tables will help. The result should be the number of rows on the fact. Once you have that, you can start trying to use the dataset to answer questions.
Quote from: bus_pass_man on 09 Dec 2025 09:17:11 AMI don't know what you mean by 'trajectories' and I think I don't need to know, although knowing would be nice.
You want the count of trajectories where start date >= {some date} and end date <= {some other date} is that a correct understanding? That is easily done, without mucking about with many to many relationships. Why didn't you try that?
| BSP Software Documentation |
| MetaManager Documentation and Knowledgebase |
| Version Control Documentation and Knowledgebase |
| BSP Software | Resources | About Us | ||
| MetaManager | BSP Software Training | BSP Software | ||
| Integrated Control Suite | YouTube Channel | Micro Strategies Inc | ||
| Security Migration | IBM Cognos | |||
| Integrated Management Suite | ||||