I'm not sure about inline views, it will still performing aggregation that I don't need. I think I didn't explain right, I've already filtered the values that I need, the problem is that default calculation of rollUp give me some calculations that I don't want like only aggregation by the second column. Suppose tree columns (DataSet Columns) Year, Moth, Import, and I want aggregation sum(Import), and the combination of all Year/Month Sum(import), also Year Sum(import), but Mont Sum(import) doesn't care
in table it will looks like YEAR | MOTH | Sum(Import) 2006 | 1 | xxxx 2005 | 1 | XXXX 2005 | 2 | xxxx 2006 | null | xxxx 2005 | null | xxxx null | null | xxxx null | 1 | xxxx null | 2 | xxxx the las tree rows are not needed, in this example I could perform filtering after rollUp i do the query by demand so it will grow depending on number of rows and columns, and will be a lot of combinations that I don't need. thanks On Thu, Nov 3, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Stephen Boesch <java...@gmail.com> wrote: > You would likely want to create inline views that perform the filtering > *before > *performing t he cubes/rollup; in this way the cubes/rollups only operate > on the pruned rows/columns. > > 2016-11-03 11:29 GMT-07:00 Andrés Ivaldi <iaiva...@gmail.com>: > >> Hello, I need to perform some aggregations and a kind of Cube/RollUp >> calculation >> >> Doing some test looks like Cube and RollUp performs aggregation over all >> posible columns combination, but I just need some specific columns >> combination. >> >> What I'm trying to do is like a dataTable where te first N columns are >> may rows and the second M values are my columns and the last columna are >> the aggregated values, like Dimension / Measures >> >> I need all the values of the N and M columns and the ones that correspond >> to the aggregation function. I'll never need the values that previous >> column has no value, ie >> >> having N=2 so two columns as rows I'll need >> R1 | R2 .... >> ## | ## .... >> ## | null .... >> >> but not >> null | ## .... >> >> as roll up does, same approach to M columns >> >> >> So the question is what could be the better way to perform this >> calculation. >> Using rollUp/Cube give me a lot of values that I dont need >> Using groupBy give me less information ( I could do several groupBy but >> that is not performant, I think ) >> Is any other way to something like that? >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Ing. Ivaldi Andres >> > > -- Ing. Ivaldi Andres
