Implement Extensibility in Account Dimension where data is already loaded.

[Nichb]

Is it feasible to implement extensibility to an account dimension with data loaded?

Currently, all base and parent accounts sit in the same TopAccounts dimension. No extensibility was configured initially, so the idea is to keep the base members in the same dimension while separating all parent level accounts into an intermediary dimension (AccountSummary) between Root and TopAccounts.

Before:

After:

We were able to separate them out via XML manipulation, and the extensibility looks good within the hierarchy:

It also seems to be correct based on the Extensibility solution:

Additionally, since the base accounts are unchanged, we did not edit the primary cube dimensions.

However, the data isn't as expected. For example, in our test QuickView, if you call a parent-level member in a member formula and do a .base expansion, it doesn't display the base members under the parent member.

If you call out specific base members , data populates as expected. 

If you call out parent members, data populates but the cells are red and you cannot expand into children. 

Let me know if there are any ideas on whether this is possible, and if so what we can do to make it function correctly.

[NicolasArgente]

Hi @Nichb 
There is nothing to do easily here. It would be better to rebuild and reload data. Start clean.
For me, it is a redo. It could be faster to redo than you might think. Then you will do a full reload too.
Hope it helps,
Nic

[Nichb]

Hey Nic,

Appreciate the quick response. We are hoping to avoid a full reload, as reloading all historical data in a controlled manner would be a huge effort.

Just to confirm, is there a "hard way" to accomplish this without reloading data? We are just trying to explore all of our options, but have been unsuccessful so far with purely updating the metadata.

Thanks,

Nick

[JackLacava]

I think you'll need Support here to have a look at your data. The fact that you have red cells at the parent level indicate that there is something funky in your structures - it could be some constraint or some other property.

Personally, I would have tackled this by creating a brand new cube, with brand new dimensions, and copying base data across with rules after a certain date - leaving the old cube untouched for historicals and moving on.

[NicolasArgente]

I am with Jack on that one! Recreating a cube is the safest too. It might be less work than you expect too.