March 31 - April 2, 2025, in Las Vegas, Nevada. Use code MSCUST for a $150 discount! Early bird discount ends December 31.
Register NowBe one of the first to start using Fabric Databases. View on-demand sessions with database experts and the Microsoft product team to learn just how easy it is to get started. Watch now
This is what I get:
The table on the right is an accurate summary of the data. As you can see, the graph incorrectly shows that there are 3 orders for the year 1997 when there are actually no orders at all. There shouldnt have year 1997 in the graph. This inaccuracy is reflected for all the years displayed in the graph.
Does anyone know what's wrong with the formula? Or why it has gone awry?
Thanks very much
Hi @JPY
Try this:
Target =
CALCULATE (
COUNT ( 'IB_SEAK HKM_HW'[PCSN] ),
FILTER (
ALL ( 'IB_SEAK HKM_HW' ),
'IB_SEAK HKM_HW'[Date Installed] <= MAX ( 'IB_SEAK HKM_HW'[Date Installed])
)
)
Best regards,
Martyn
Hi @MartynRamsden,
I tried this and i still don't get the accurate result.
This is what I got:
If you refer to the table that I provided in the original post, you'd see that the number is correct for both 1996 and 1997 but is inaccurate for the rest of the years. For example, for 1998, the number should be 2+0+ 1 = 3 but the measure that you suggested renders 5 instead.
Thanks for the suggestion though! Would you happen to know why the rest of the years are wrong?
Hi @JPY
I think I understand why that didn't work - are you using a date dimension table?
If so, try this:
Target =
VAR MaxDate = MAX ( 'Calendar'[Date] )
VAR Result =
CALCULATE (
COUNTROWS( 'IB_SEAK HKM_HW' ),
FILTER (
ALL ( 'Calendar'[Date] ),
'Calendar'[Date] <= MaxDate)
)
RETURN
Result
Best regards,
Martyn
Hi @MartynRamsden,
Thanks for the reply!!
I think I found the problem. I should use ALLEXCEPT('IB_SEAK HKM_HW','IB_SEAK HKM_HW'[Model]) instead of "ALL" since I have a filter applied on Model.
Thank you!
Joyce
Excellent - glad you figured it out!
Hi @MartynRamsden,
Thanks for providing the previous formula! It helped me a great deal.
However, I seem to have encountered another obstacle.
I used the formula that is listed below and when i look at the data on a yearly basis, the graphs that I have for the year and the model are accurate but the graph showing the cumulative number of models by year and sub-region is wrong.
For example, in 2000, there were 8 machines and this is reflected correctly in the diagram showing the total number and the model since there are 5 HE and 3 LE (thus, 8 machines). However, this isnt reflected in the diagram which shows the number of machines by year and sub region, since the total number shown is only 5 (SEA NORTH) + 1 (SEA SOUTH) = 6.
Do you know why this is happening? Is there any part of the measure that I am using that causes this problem? I've also applied some model filters and this can be seen on the extreme right hand side of the above screenshot.
Thank you for your help!
Best regards,
JPY
Hi @MartynRamsden,
Ok sure!
You can see it via the below link:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZmwZTNLhzOr7gdxlZYOB9rDoJbBdLYvZ/view?usp=sharing
Thanks,
Joyce
March 31 - April 2, 2025, in Las Vegas, Nevada. Use code MSCUST for a $150 discount!
Your insights matter. That’s why we created a quick survey to learn about your experience finding answers to technical questions.
Arun Ulag shares exciting details about the Microsoft Fabric Conference 2025, which will be held in Las Vegas, NV.
User | Count |
---|---|
132 | |
90 | |
88 | |
64 | |
58 |
User | Count |
---|---|
203 | |
141 | |
107 | |
73 | |
70 |