'Trace Feeders' contradicts 'Check Feeders'

[CiskoWalt]

Hello,

I have attached a Power Point file.

I have a rule that is not Fed. I know it is not fed because when we turn on zero suppression, it disapears; when we right-click on it and select 'check feeders' a value of 'not fed' appears.

When I generate a view, in server Explorer, that contains the Feeder cells, I can right-click on the n-level cell and see that it is feeding the target rule-based cell. (slides 5 and 6)

The Rule:

['000001', 'Cash-Contractual Rights', 'ACTUAL'] = N: ['All Departments','Contractual Rights Cash Adjustment by Account'];

'000001' = Department dimension
'Cash-Contractual Rights' = GlAcct dimension
'ACTUAL' = category dim

The Feeder:

['Contractual Rights Cash Adjustment by Account', 'ACTUAL']=>['Cash-Contractual Rights'];

'Contractual Rights Cash Adjustment by Account' = GlAcct dimesion
'ACTUAL' = category dim


thanks,

Walt

[tomok]

Since you left off the reference to the Department dimension in your feeder you are feeding matching departments on both sides. This means that '00001', ''Contractual Rights Cash Adjustment by Account', 'ACTUAL' is feeding '00001', 'Cash-Contractual Rights', 'ACTUAL', etc. I think what you want is:

Code: Select all

['All Departments','Contractual Rights Cash Adjustment by Account', 'ACTUAL']=>['00001','Cash-Contractual Rights','ACTUAL'];

[CiskoWalt]

Tomok,

Thank you. Your suggestion worked.

I am not sure why it did not work.

New feeder:

new Feeder

new_feeder.png (64.52 KiB) Viewed 4299 times

Referencing a Consolidation on a feeder is shorthand for 'all n-level' elements under the consolidated element. TM1 does not feed from a consolidated element.

Using 'All Departments' is stating feed if any of the n-level departments has a non-zero balance, then feed the cells on the RHS of the feeder statement.
Using ''Contractual Rights Cash Adjustment by Account'' is stating feed if any of the n-level Glacct has a non-zero balance, then feed the cells on the RHS of the feeder.

['All Departments','Contractual Rights Cash Adjustment by Account', 'ACTUAL']=>['00001','Cash-Contractual Rights','ACTUAL'];

We see from the image above, that there is one n-level department ('000001') that has Actual balances.
We see from the image above, that there is one n-level Glacct ('201105-0000000-000') that has Actual balances.

For the elements that we did not specify, TM1 will match the elements in from the feeder (LHS) to the cells being fed (RHS).

In the Feeder we did not specify Entity (223), YEAR (2012), Month (Dec) and BalType (Orig), but TM1 found a value in that cell reference on the LHS so it feeds
the cell definition on the RHS that have the matching elements:

Matched Values Entity (223), YEAR (2012), Month (Dec) and BalType (Orig)
Specified Values: Dept ('000001') GLACCT( 'Cash-Contractual Rights') Category ('ACTUAL')


In the previous version of the Feeder, I did not specify the Dept on the LHS. However, we see that the only Dept that has a balance in the feeder is '000001'

I thought that TM1 would match the dept where activity was found on the LHS with the Dept specified on the RHS, just as it did with the other unspecified elements.

Can I conclude that:

1) TM1 will match elements if they are not specified - not on the LHS or the RHS
2) If you include an element (n-level or c-level) on the RHS, =>['00001','Cash-Contractual Rights','ACTUAL'] you must explicity include an element (n-level or c-level) on the feeders (LHS)?

Thanks,

Walt

[tomok]

What you can conclude from this is you need to study up on the ramifications of using the shorthand notation ( using the [] instead of DB()) in rules. When you use the shorthand notation:

If you omit dimensions from the LHS and RHS it means use only the matching elements from the ommitted dimensions.
If you specify an element on either the LHS or RHS and omit it from the other it is the same as specifying that EXACT same element on the side missing the specific reference.