| Total functions omitted in favour of Add Aggregate ? [message #243700] |
Wed, 20 June 2007 17:00 |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
2.2 (RC3) does not include the Total functions anymore, but has the Add
Aggregation option instead. Although the new Quick Tool "Aggregation"
simplifies the creation of a new data binding for a total element, this
means that i have to create e.g. 24 data bindings manually when i have a
table with 6 measure columns and 4 group levels - in my view this is rather
inconvenient.
Can someone please comment on that. May be i have overlooked how i can
easily add many aggregations to a table without the former Total functions
(see my posting from 05/17/07 below) that worked with relative groupings
("Aggregate on" was based on the context where a data element was placed
unless otherwise specified).
Thanks in advance!
Spunk
--
Subject: @birt-dev-team: What's the motivation behind the Aggregate On
setting for a data column binding?
Hi,
what was the motivation behind the Aggregate On setting for a data column?
Why was this property introduced?
Every aggregate function has a third parameter to specify the grouping
level, but it looks as if this third parameter is ignored and only the
"'Aggregate on" setting seems to be relevant.
As a result when you have a simple table with three groups and a column with
a measure and you want to print out the Total.sum() of the measure for every
group, it seems that you have to create three data bindings with the same
aggregate function but with different "aggregate on" settings. For a second
measure you would need another three data bindings.
I would expect that it would suffice to create one data binding with
aggregate function Total.sum(row["Measure1"]) and then put three data items
referencing this single data binding into the three group footers. Due to
the missing third parameter of the Total.sum() function the total sum should
be calculated for the current group. IMHO there is no need for a Aggregate
on setting.
Thanks in advance for any hints on this topic.
Der Spunk
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03168 seconds
Home