Project and Portfolio Management Practitioners Forum
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Table Component Data excluded from Operational Reporting / BOBJ.

Highlighted
pepdwill
Senior Member

Table Component Data excluded from Operational Reporting / BOBJ.

Is it possible to report on Table Component data (KCRT_TABLE_ENTRIES) from the HP packaged Operational Reporting / Business Objects solution?

 

I am not seeing this table anywhere in the operational reporting schema document, or mentioned at all.  Why is it not there?  Why would this data not be carried over via the ETL like all other relevent request data?  Did HP drop the ball on this?  Am I misunderstanding something? 

 

Assuming this table isn't there and isn't synched to the Operational Reporting schema from the HP provided ETL jobs, what options do customers have other than creation of a new reporting solution from scratch? 

 

Looking for any  ideas, thoughts, comments on this matter.  

 

 

Thanks,

Danny

2 REPLIES
Kerim KILIC
Frequent Visitor

Re: Table Component Data excluded from Operational Reporting / BOBJ.

Hello Danny,

 

What im thinking about operation reporting tool is, it is mainly developed for the existing reports and universe. Thats why etl and universes are not flexible at all. What hp provides is that they allowing to extend ETL process. It is documented in the attachment. But i dont choose that way to customize ETL, im creating materialized views or derived tables in the universe to take data from tables not extracted via ETL. Im suggesting this way, it is more easier and faster. 

 

You can create a materialized view and schedule it daily to extract table entries table. 

 

Regards

pepdwill
Senior Member

Re: Table Component Data excluded from Operational Reporting / BOBJ.

Thanks Kerim for the quality informational response, and attaching this document which I hadn't previously seen.  I was already thinking that the best alternative option would be to create a separate derived table/materialized view, and I think you confirmed it.  The "simple" steps described in the document to modify the ETL package/job don't really seem all that simple at all; not nearly as simple as just creating a one-off process to pull this table data in. 

 

Luckily since the link between the OR and app db exists, adding a derived table/materialized view shouldn't be too difficult. 

 

All that said - I am still dumbfounded why HP wouldn't just include this table as part of what gets carried over.  Table components are a powerful feature that can greatly extend the functionality of the tool at the request level, and thus really *should* be part of the OOTB ETL process and OR structure.

 

 

 

Thanks,

Danny

//Add this to "OnDomLoad" event