Questions about Dimension Role-Playing
4 posters
Page 1 of 1
Questions about Dimension Role-Playing
On page 110 of "The Data Warehouse Toolkit (2nd Edition)" it talks about basically creating a view for each "role" the time table might represent. Seems like you would end up with an excessive number of views. The 2nd paragraph states that you can't join multiple foreign keys to the same dimension table. While this is true, no one would really do that. You would use table aliases in SQL and refer to the same time dimensoin table with different alias names. With the exception of making the data model easier to read I don't see the benefit of creating views to represent the same dimension as different roles. Seem like you will end up with a bunch of views on top of the time dimension. Is it common to create multiple views like this?
Thanks,
Mike
Thanks,
Mike
mea0730- Posts : 21
Join date : 2010-05-15
Location : San Jose, CA
Re: Questions about Dimension Role-Playing
I generally just role name the foreign keys if I have multiple FK's to the same parent.
BoxesAndLines- Posts : 1212
Join date : 2009-02-03
Location : USA
Re: Questions about Dimension Role-Playing
I know in SSAS cube configuration, one way to enable a dimension table to play multiple roles in one fact table is to create separate views on top of the the dimension. If there is no other better way to do it, then I guess it would be an enforcement for the best practice to create views for different roles for a role-playing dimension. In practice, we are always creating a logical layer on top of physical model to make the model easier to understand for users' consumption, rather then letting them to dig into coding details to find out the logics, in this case, it might be through the surrogate key pipeline in the ETL process.
hang- Posts : 528
Join date : 2010-05-07
Location : Brisbane, Australia
Re: Questions about Dimension Role-Playing
Views are optional. It depends on how you plan to deploy the BI side.
As Hang pointed out, it is advantageous to have views to support SSAS. But, other tools, such as Business Objects and Microstrategy, you create aliases within the tool. There is no need to create a view.
And, depending on your own internal policies, some shops create views of everything, wither they need it or not.
As Hang pointed out, it is advantageous to have views to support SSAS. But, other tools, such as Business Objects and Microstrategy, you create aliases within the tool. There is no need to create a view.
And, depending on your own internal policies, some shops create views of everything, wither they need it or not.
Re: Questions about Dimension Role-Playing
Thanks for all the replies!
Yes, the tool we are using (WebFOCUS) allows "meta data" level aliases as well.
Thanks again!!
Yes, the tool we are using (WebFOCUS) allows "meta data" level aliases as well.
Thanks again!!
mea0730- Posts : 21
Join date : 2010-05-15
Location : San Jose, CA
Similar topics
» Dimension Role-Playing Bus Matrix
» Role-playing dimension or seperate dimensions?
» Role-playing dimensions
» Role Playing vs single generic Conformed (for drill-across) time dimension
» How do I join a role playing date dimension view with a Fact table in SQL Server?
» Role-playing dimension or seperate dimensions?
» Role-playing dimensions
» Role Playing vs single generic Conformed (for drill-across) time dimension
» How do I join a role playing date dimension view with a Fact table in SQL Server?
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|