Quote from: dougp on 15 Dec 2025 10:20:30 AMThat's always a good double-check.  So if you write custom SQL for this, you get different results than what Cognos is producing?  Cognos is just generating SQL for you based on what you have created in Reporting combined with the way the model was defined.  So what's different between the SQL that Cognos is generating and the SQL that you wrote that produced the result you wanted?  Did you make a mistake in the report?  Is there an incorrect relationship in the model?  ...?

You provided a very simple query as an example but the results are different in case of complex and/or multiple queries. With inner and outer queries you can control which filter is applied where and make sure they are exclusive which is what the OP's problem seems to be. Many people create multiple filters without realizing that they are not exclusive and one filter will clash with the other causing the results to be wrong. It is true that Cognos will still re-write the SQL you write but it does not alter the logic of your SQL. I am working for a company which used Deltek's  Costpoint which is an ERP only for government contractors (project based sales only) so the data is small but there are hundred of reports which take hours and even days to run. I re-made those reports using hand written SQL and they run in seconds now! If any report is using joins from a package then never create joins in the report. It's better to write your own SQL which is a complete SQL containing all queries and use that complete SQL in one query in the report instead of creating separate small SQLs and then joining them in the report. That's what did the trick.

There is a company where the BI manager always installs the latest version of Cognos as soon as it is released but never upgrades the reports. He didn't even know that reports should be upgraded until I told him. Most of the reports are written in version 8x and 10x. While IBM says that they would run in newer versions even if not upgraded but this time I saw some reports stopped running showing syntax errors in the latest version while the same reports are running in the prior version.

Any thoughts? It maybe that the SQL generated in the latest version is slightly different than the earlier one.

How did you end up solving this?  I'm looking for a way to make Cognos available through the same authentication we use for M-365, which I understand is SAML-based.

This topic has been moved to Reporting.

https://www.cognoise.com/index.php?topic=38483.0

Quote from: Good Friend on 27 Jan 2026 02:01:52 PM2.  When you test that column, what does the data look like?
    In CSV the format changes to YYYY/MM/DD

No, when you test that column in CA, preferably in the modelling tool which you are using.  Also, when you test that column in your DB's administrative tool.

The object of these exercises is to identify where in the chain things go wrong.

Quote from: Good Friend on 27 Jan 2026 02:01:52 PM3.  If you use the cast function to cast the column to date what does the data look like?
    I casted it to varchar and HTML AND EXCEL gives YYYY-MM-DD which is the desired format but users are running this report in CSV and exporting it

No, when you do the cast it to date and view it in CA.  Also, why, if your column is a date data type, are you casting it to varchar?

Off the top of my head I don't know what variations native date data type columns can have for each DB vendor.   Certainly if it is cast to date in Cognos it will be rendered in the ISO 8601 format, which is YYYY-MM-DD.

Hi Everyone,

I have a report (403b) i have been building and adding features too as I learn and want to know if it could be optimized in report studio.  It is currently at 5 minutes and I want to add comparisons to the prior month.  I tried some of the property panels but was not able to notice a difference and I am not sure if I am doing it correctly.  (Concurrent, Use sql with clause, Data Base only, Join filter to in).  At the description level these seemed easy to understand but they didn't work enough to notice.

The report has 3 main queries + prompt queries + render features. The 3 main queries are Gross earnings, Point in Time for EE Status and Point in Time for Dept.  I used 2 joins 0:1 on both sides to create the final query with the correct amounts. A picture of the queries is attached.

Any tips or better articles to read would be greatly appreciated. Or if this seems like an appropriate time for this.  I don't have much to compare it too.  I am working in UKG, IBM Cognos Analytics with Watson 11.2.4

 

Still didn't answer the questions.

2. So, you're viewing the output in Notepad and the format of that column is YYYY/MM/DD?

4. Opening the CSV how?  Is the user opening the CSV file in Notepad?  Or are they allowing Excel to mess up the data?

I'm sorry if I couldnt answer your questions properly earlier.

1.  What is the data type of the column which is the source of your data?
     Using Current_Date so it is a DATE data type

2.  When you test that column, what does the data look like?
    In CSV the format changes to YYYY/MM/DD

3.  If you use the cast function to cast the column to date what does the data look like?
     I casted it to varchar and HTML AND EXCEL gives YYYY-MM-DD which is the desired format but users are running this report in CSV and exporting it

4.  Can you answer Doug's question.  Are you using a text editor to look at the CSV output?
     They are downloading the CSV file and opening the .CSV as is

Hi all, pleasure to have found this community.

Is anyone hiring these days? Finding roles hard to come by. I have 20+ YOE. Looking for something stable. Any leads? Let me know.

That's some deep mining, digging up a question from 16 years ago...

It looks like everybody was working really hard on this.  It's much easier.  You just need to make FM notice that a change has been made.

If your query subject expressions is...

select * from [blah]
...you just need to edit it somehow.  I usually add a space...

select *  from [blah]
Now FM knows it changed.  Click OK.

New column added.