cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Crystal KYFs Summarizing Differently Based on Order of Chars in Query

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello experts,

I am noticing some strange activity when trying to summarize key figures in a Crystal Report off a BW Query. The characteristics in the query form a natural 1:M hierarchy like Project, WBS, Network Activity (though the query doesn't use an ACTUAL hierarchy). There are some other characteristics in the rows that aren't guaranteed to be a 1:M relationship and we need to summarize by these as well.

There are two things I have tried that have affected the Crystal report. I have each of these fields (WBS, Network Activity, etc) as a summary in a group header, and the user chooses which they want to summarize by, and all group headers except the chosen one are hidden.

1. If I move around the order of the characteristics in the Rows in Query Designer, the summarized totals in Crystal change. It seems to be most consistent when I put the rows in order of the natural hierarchy, but there is still the highest level (called Reporting Level) that is off. Can't find a rhyme or reason why some things are off sometimes and not other times after rearranging.

2. If I move around the order of the group headers in the Crystal report, this causes repeating values (it doesn't sum all the repeated WBS's into 1 row). Again, it seems to work best when the group headers are ordered in the natural order of the 1:M relationships.

My question is, when grouping like this in CR, is there a rule of thumb to follow as far as how the characteristics are ordered in the query, or how the group headers are ordered?

Specs:

Crystal Reports, BOBJ, Int kit all at: XI3.1, SP3, fp3.6

BW 7.01 SP06

Thanks,

Chad

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (2)

Answers (2)

IngoH
Advisor
Advisor
0 Kudos

Hi Chad,

you mentioned in your first point the order of characteristics but you also talk about a hierarchy. Is it an actual hierarchy in the BEx Query or is this about a set of characteristics / dimensions and you simply would like to group by those.

on your item #2 - yes that can lead to what you see depending on what the relationships are in the cube between these characteristics.

Perhaps you can outline a small set of sample rows here and I am sure we will find the right way.

ingo

Former Member
0 Kudos

Anyone have any ideas?