Is it possible to create analytic report from multiple class ? for example I want to create summary report sales order, budgeting, invoicing in one page. I am so glad if I can create custom chart or custom query too.
This question is a bit broad, but i understand where it's leading: Business Intelligence.
Yes it could be possible to combine data from multiple business models. Actually Odoo is doing excatly that in their reports like the invoice reports.
It's done by creating new Odoo models which do not create their own tables but database views. Here is an example (invoice report) from Odoo 11.
Database views always have their advantages and disadvantages, but that shouldn't be the topic here.
Now you have to get your requirements together and to create your own BI Odoo model. Of course, not everything is possible and can fail due to topics such as missing relations or performance.
Related
I am a newbie to HANA.Our org is planning to build a native datawarehouse on top of SAP HANA. Till date we have implemented SCD types using the ETL approach in SAP BODS. Wondering if some types of SCD's could be offloaded onto the HANA Studio by utilising the Views in HANA. Please help me in this regard.
This is a rather broad question that does not allow for a single correct answer.
With slowly changing dimensions (SCD) one tries to preserve data changes over time in a data warehouse. The idea is that changing “master”-data, e.g. which sales person is responsible for which sales region, can be correctly reflected in queries.
One approach (SCD type 2) uses validity timestamps for the records to indicate the time for which those were the valid information.
This approach can be implemented easily with HANA as all one needs to do is to add those validity timestamps to the dimension table. HANA 2 takes this a bit further by providing Bi-temporal history tables (system- and application time).
For this use case one could use the application time ranges in combination with the SELECT ... AS OF TIMESTAMP... feature. This will automatically filter the records that were valid at the provided point in time.
This is also supported with calculation views, CDS views and SQL views.
Whether or not that is improving upon your existing setup is a different question altogether.
I have an SSRS report that I'm using multiple datasets (each in the form of stored procedures) to extract information for. The application that this report will reside in is used to enter audit information along with files. What I'm hoping to accomplish is a report layout similar to this:.
Since I'm dealing with a lot of 1-to-many relationships and tables, I thought it would be best to use multiple datasets rather than write a stored procedure that joins these tables, but maybe I'm wrong?
Can anyone recommend how to accomplish this layout? I've tried using Subreports embedded into a data matrix that displays the Issue description, issue images, action description, and action file fields but the output isn't very nice (see below) and I've been told that data matrices are better suited for numeric data rather than text data.
You should have a look here
It seems like it has been published for you.
I am working on spiking out a BI solution and I am trying to create a Hierarchy in out 'Client' dimension more or less to replicate what I know the end users will do.
The Client dimension table has 3 foreign key relationships with other tables, each of these relationships are standalone from the others. They are Role, Service Type, and Status.
Whenever this dimension will be used it will almost always be with the Role attribute first so I tried to create hierarchies like Role -> Service Type -> Client. Now when I try to process with this setup I get the error "The table that is required for a join cannot be reached based on the relationships in the data source view"
Is there any way to create a Hierarchy with disparate attributes like this?
It isn't possible to build a hierarchy across multiple dimensions that are not related to one another in that way.
One option would be to restructure your schema to a Star schema rather than a Snowflake schema. If that's not an option, depending on the details you might be able to build a query in SSAS or a view in SQL server, and then create a dimension in SSAS from that.
From the information given it's hard to judge whether Role, Service Type, and Status should be in separate tables, but have a good think about this. Should the attributes you want to use from them actually be attributes of Client? Would doing this allow you to get rid of some of those tables and/or reduce the amount of Snowflaking? Remember that dimensional models are very different from a normal relational model: the aim is to keep the number of joins low, and it can be acceptable to repeat attributes in different tables if that's going to be more efficient. Of course, sometimes restructuring just isn't a realistic prospect, which is where a query or view might come in useful to work around this issue.
I've been learning SSAS recently myself, and have found that when I'm struggling to get something working in SSAS, the problem is very often the underlying schema not being set up in the best way for what I'm trying to accomplish.
(Apologies if this is a little vague but it's difficult to be more detailed without knowing the nature of the data, and I don't yet have the ability to comment and ask for more information!)
I have been trying to learn hana these past few days and have been getting some problems. So As i see SAP HANA is used for de-normalization of data(as per some tutorials that i have seen). So i make the analytic views and I have my data denormalized after making the analytical views. What next?. How do I harness/use these views to create reports for business analysis. I need to generate several reports based on this de-normalized data(which i intend to ultimately use for a website based product). Do i need to create different Anaytical views for different reports?
HANA is not for denormalization of your data. You don't have to create aggregate and denormalized tables to speed up your analytics. In a normal analytics scenario you might build these but this will result in duplicate data, double maintenance to keep these up date etc..
Instead of this you can use your normal normalized database tables as a master/transactional data foundation and then build analytic views on these. How many views have to be created for different reports depends on your actual business needs, because views contain data in many aspects so they can be reused. In case of more complex reports you can of course create calculation views to get the exact data you need.
HTH
We are having a system that gather large quantities of data each month and performes rather advanced calculations that increase the database even more. Since we have the requirements from the customer that we need to store data for fast access three years back and that we must be able to access older data (up to ten years), this however can be low performance and requires some work. We want to avoid performance issues where the database and its tables grows out of proportion.
After discussing using SQL Enterprise (VERY costly and full of traps since we haven't gotten the know-how) and since our system have so many tables that referenses each other we are leaning towards creating some kind of history tables to which we move data in a monthly fashion and rewrite the select queries that we have based on parameters to search either in the regular table or in the history or both depending on the situation.
Since we also are using NHibernate for mapping I was wondering if it is possbible to create a mapping file that handles this by itself (almost) using some sort of polymorfism or inheritance in which each object is stored in different tables based on parameters?
I know this sounds complicated and strange and that there is other methods to perform this but I this question I would rather have people answering the question asked and not give other sugestions to use instead.
As far as I know NHibernate can't do that (each class can be mapped to one table/view )but you can use SQL Queries or StoredProcedures (depends on the version of NHibernate that you are using) to populate mapped objects.
In your case you can have a combined view created by making unions of different tables Then you can use a SQL query to populated your entity.
There's also another solution that you create a summary object for your queries that uses that view ,therefore you can use both HQL and criteria to query this object.
Short answer "no". I would not create views as you mention a lot of joining.
Personally I would create summary tables and map to these directly using a stateless session or a very least mutable=false on the class definition. Think of these summary tables as denormalised data for report only. The only drawback is if historic data changes on a regular basis then the summary tables also needs changing. If historical data never changes then this should be simple to achieve.
I would also most probably store these summary tables on another catalog rather than adding to the size of the current system.
Its not a quick win this one I am afraid.