06-21-2022 02:23 PM
Hi All,
We're currently trying to map IC relationships in the transformation rules where the source data doesn't contain this field. We can map this based on the GL account from the ERP system but just unsure on how to do this in OneStream. Essentially we'd like to use 1-1 mapping but based a different column other than the IC in the source, is this possible?
Thanks,
Solved! Go to Solution.
06-21-2022 02:32 PM
Hey SamKing: yup, OneStream has you covered. This sounds like a standard Composite Transformation Rule.
Your rule expression will include both the target dimension (IC) as well as the dimension which can be used to identify the mapping (Account, in this instance) in the format of: A#UniqueAccount:I#*. Specify the I# target as the Target Value
This can be read as, 'anything from A#UniqueAccount from any I# should map to the I# Target Value'
Cheers,
-DB
06-21-2022 02:32 PM
Hey SamKing: yup, OneStream has you covered. This sounds like a standard Composite Transformation Rule.
Your rule expression will include both the target dimension (IC) as well as the dimension which can be used to identify the mapping (Account, in this instance) in the format of: A#UniqueAccount:I#*. Specify the I# target as the Target Value
This can be read as, 'anything from A#UniqueAccount from any I# should map to the I# Target Value'
Cheers,
-DB
06-22-2022 04:26 AM
Hi there,
On your source file, the account will give you the IC member? If this statement is correct, then in your datasource, you can map your Account column to your IC dimension. After than you simply use a transformation rule where you transform your A# Member (which will be Account) to your IC members
Please give a kudo if it helps.
06-22-2022 05:08 AM
In addition, there are two snippets showing you samples how to do it using a business rule:
06-22-2022 03:34 PM
Sam. this should be as straight forward as referencing the account column as the IC dimension in the data source...then mapping 1 to 1 in the transformation rule. Doesn't seem like you need anything fancy at all.
06-22-2022 04:14 PM
Thank you all!
I've used the rule expression suggested by db_pdx and this has worked perfectly.