<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: DAX Doubt (bidrectionality and cardinality between some tables) in DAX Commands and Tips</title>
    <link>https://community.fabric.microsoft.com/t5/DAX-Commands-and-Tips/DAX-Doubt-bidrectionality-and-cardinality-between-some-tables/m-p/2190179#M51175</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="javascript:void(0)" data-lia-user-mentions="" data-lia-user-uid="208670" data-lia-user-login="Ricardo77" class="lia-mention lia-mention-user"&gt;Ricardo77&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;SQL BI had a video this weekend on a scenario/model that seems very similar to this:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://www.sqlbi.com/tv/differences-between-generate-and-crossjoin-solving-business-scenarios-unplugged-37/" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.sqlbi.com/tv/differences-between-generate-and-crossjoin-solving-business-scenarios-unplugged-37/&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;They used a SUMMARIZE of the AD table to move the filter to Bridge1.&amp;nbsp; On your diagram you have the arrows going both directions but I'm assuming your relationships are all single-direction.&amp;nbsp; If that's not the case you should look to have the single-direction: bi-directional relationships can be a cause of slow queries.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2021 11:32:23 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>PaulOlding</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-11-15T11:32:23Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>DAX Doubt (bidrectionality and cardinality between some tables)</title>
      <link>https://community.fabric.microsoft.com/t5/DAX-Commands-and-Tips/DAX-Doubt-bidrectionality-and-cardinality-between-some-tables/m-p/2190020#M51167</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hello,&amp;nbsp; due to confidentiality i don’t have a PBIX neither data to send, but i think i have the MOC and the right information to share.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;img /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I’m trying to create a table that shows the Client that has the highest number of Hostnames (in table Win). I want to do something similiar in table SQL but i’ll procede with the Win example.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Simply placing the email and a measure, this is painfully slow, like 50 minutes…&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Test = CALCULATE(DISTINCTCOUNT(‘Win’[Hostname]),&lt;BR /&gt;CROSSFILTER(AD[Key_Not_Showing_onImage], DoesntHelp[key1], None),&lt;BR /&gt;CROSSFILTER(Bridge1[key_AD], DoesntHelp[key2] , None),&lt;BR /&gt;)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I was trying to do a SUMMARIZE, like this, but it doesn’t work, due to the fact that the relation between AD and Bridge1 is n to 1. Notice the red box.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Test = CALCULATE(&lt;BR /&gt;DISTINCTCOUNT(‘Win’[Hostname]),&lt;BR /&gt;SUMMARIZE(Client[email],AD[keyAD],Bridge1[key_AD],Win[key_AD]&lt;BR /&gt;CROSSFILTER(AD[Key_Not_Showing_onImage], DoesntHelp[key1], None),&lt;BR /&gt;CROSSFILTER(Bridge1[key_AD], DoesntHelp[key2] , None),&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;So, if i create a filter in Client, like in column Company (not shown), it is relatively quick.&lt;BR /&gt;Ideally, I would like to get the clients with the highest number of Win Hostnames, of all companies (not filtered by company).&lt;BR /&gt;How can i do this calculation be quicker? In a measure or in a “virtual table”? If it is in a virtual table how can i show it in Power BI?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I would love if someone can help me out, and also referring videos or webcasts that allows us to understand these type of DAX calculations.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks in advance.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2021 10:20:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.fabric.microsoft.com/t5/DAX-Commands-and-Tips/DAX-Doubt-bidrectionality-and-cardinality-between-some-tables/m-p/2190020#M51167</guid>
      <dc:creator>Ricardo77</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-11-15T10:20:58Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: DAX Doubt (bidrectionality and cardinality between some tables)</title>
      <link>https://community.fabric.microsoft.com/t5/DAX-Commands-and-Tips/DAX-Doubt-bidrectionality-and-cardinality-between-some-tables/m-p/2190179#M51175</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Hi&amp;nbsp;&lt;a href="javascript:void(0)" data-lia-user-mentions="" data-lia-user-uid="208670" data-lia-user-login="Ricardo77" class="lia-mention lia-mention-user"&gt;Ricardo77&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;SQL BI had a video this weekend on a scenario/model that seems very similar to this:&amp;nbsp;&lt;A href="https://www.sqlbi.com/tv/differences-between-generate-and-crossjoin-solving-business-scenarios-unplugged-37/" target="_blank"&gt;https://www.sqlbi.com/tv/differences-between-generate-and-crossjoin-solving-business-scenarios-unplugged-37/&lt;/A&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;They used a SUMMARIZE of the AD table to move the filter to Bridge1.&amp;nbsp; On your diagram you have the arrows going both directions but I'm assuming your relationships are all single-direction.&amp;nbsp; If that's not the case you should look to have the single-direction: bi-directional relationships can be a cause of slow queries.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2021 11:32:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.fabric.microsoft.com/t5/DAX-Commands-and-Tips/DAX-Doubt-bidrectionality-and-cardinality-between-some-tables/m-p/2190179#M51175</guid>
      <dc:creator>PaulOlding</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2021-11-15T11:32:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

