Entity Consolidation status change for Forecast scenarios

BSK
New Contributor III

Hi Folks,

We have 12 forecast scenarios and 12 FX rate tables for each FC scenario.

When we update the FX Rates in one table, it's upsetting the status in all other Forecast scenarios, but not Actual.

We don't want other scenarios status getting affected when ever FX rates updated. 

and there is impact status rules exists in our application.

Appreciate your advise. Thanks

 

 

4 REPLIES 4

ChrisLoran
Valued Contributor

Please confirm
- version of OneStream you are using
- that you are using he FX Rates table in the Application | FX Rates , and not storing the FX rates as cube data
- that each scenario is configured to use separate rate tables
- when you say status , I presume you mean Impact Status.  What Impact Status do you see when the rate changes?  Is it "MC" ? or "TR" ?
- Are Actuals and Forecast scenarios in different cubes? It could be the use of separate cubes that may explain why Actuals are not impacted?

I am not sure if the platform is actually designed to create a "TR" Impact Status only on relevant scenarios that are linked to the particular FX Rate Tables.  It doesn't do this on my own development application. Is this what you were expecting to happen?

Could it be that it is writing an MC status to all the scenarios that are in a Forecasting *Cube*, irrespective of the rate table that each scenario is using?

NickHymes
New Contributor III

Hi BSK,

 

You would have to have separate rate types for each scenario. Scenarios are designed to use separate rate tables for each. 

BSK
New Contributor III

Hi Nick,

We have seperate rate table for each forecast scenario. we have 12 FC scenarios and 12 rate tables.

Thx

BSK
New Contributor III

Thanks for the reply Chris.

- 7.0.1 ( Cloud)

- Yes, we have the FX rates table seperately configured for each scenarion under Application->FX Rates

- The other scenario's entity status  getting changed to OKMC.

 - Actual and FC are in same cube

-Yes, it should impact only that particular scenario to TR, But it's not in our case. 

Just want to know which properly is causing this issue.