We are to create a transparent partition using EAS between 2 ASO cubes. When we use member relation functions such as @IDESCENDANTS on the dimension name, the partition validates successfully however no data comes across in the target database. the member names match exactly between source and target dimensions. When we change the partition definition to use UDA function on dimension name and level 0 of dimension, the data comes through which suggests the aggregation is occuring dynamically. Not ideal as we have a over 600 users that will retrieve on the target cube.
We have tried to overcome this by building the dimensions in the source database to have Parent members to have the ~ property and level 0 members to be store. This fails as no data comes across.
As you may figure out, we have competing issues of data pull through from source database and retrieval performance.
Any thoughts on what may be going wrong here?
Scoring disabled. You must be logged in to score posts.