Archive

Posts Tagged ‘PerformancePoint’

On the search for the perfect OLAP browser

September 22nd, 2009

Browsing Analysis Services cubes is typically done by power users in SQL Server Management Studio or Excel. However, because of a requirement stating that intranet and non-intranet users need to be able to access and browse an OLAP cube I had to go out there and try to find the best OLAP browser on the market. The client had been using Dundas OLAP Services with mixed success, and had purchased PerformancePoint with ProClarity but never used it because of infrastructure issues. That is why they used Dundas as an interim solution. Dundas’s OLAP Services is a user-friendly tool, but tis performance is not ideal when it comes to large grids, so my client wanted something combining Dundas’s usability with Excel’s performance, which could be used both internally and externally.

I contacted Microsoft with a question: “What tools can I use?” They came back to me with the following suggestions:

  • IntelliMax Solutions OLAP Browser (an Australian partner)
  • BI Companion
  • Panorama
  • Dundas
  • ProClarity

I added PerformancePoint to the list, as well as Radar-Soft’s OLAP Browser, so my final list was:

  1. IntelliMax
  2. BI Companion
  3. Panorama
  4. Dundas
  5. ProClarity
  6. PerformancePoint
  7. Radar-Soft

IntelliMax Solutions

A sales guy told me that they will organise an online demo for me, and then if I am interested, they will organise an evaluation installation of their product on our servers. That just happened half an hour ago and it immediately became apparent that the product lack one critical piece of functionality – it does not support attribute hierarchies. So, I cannot use anything but user-defined custom hierarchies, because according to the support person, including attribute hierarchies make the grids and reports “too big”. I, however, definitely need these big grids/reports. Otherwise, the tool is nice and simple with very obvious support for Custom Data – you can define this property from the UI, which makes it easier to work on non-Kerberos enabled environments. It also should integrate with PerformancePoint and Reporting Services, but I did not test those parts, because of the aforementioned problem with attribute hierarchies.

BI Companion

They were very friendly and responsive. I got an evaluation install, tried it out and it worked fine, apart from a small bug with non-aggregatable dimension hierarchies, which they fixed immediately. I was quite impressed with the product. It seemed to perform slightly better than Dundas, but it also was slightly less user-friendly. The interface imitates Cube Browser and is very feature-rich. Unfortunately, the HTML version did not work with Firefox, so they suggested using a SilverLight version, which was not supported by my client. As one of my requirements was cross-browser operability (IE and Firefox at least), BI Companion became a no-go-to for me.

Panorama

Panorama’s NovaView product competed with PerformancePoint as a dashboard creation tool and I have no idea why Microsoft recommended a competitor. I contacted their reseller in Australia and the sales person organised an online demo. I could play with their grid analytics components and it seemed OK. NovaView comes in two versions – a legacy Java version, as well as a new Flash version still in development. The Flash version is quite nice, but still harder to use than BI Companion or Dundas. As a big miss in the current version, Panorama NovaView does not let the user to add/remove dimension hierarchies from its grid columns. It can be done on rows, but not on columns, which is frustrating and ultimately a critical lack of functionality in my case. The Panorama support person told me that “they did not want to release all features yet” and that they have it going in their lab. He also advised me to use the Java version until the Flash version gets updated. I did and found out that the Java version is indeed fast, but not as fast as Excel and ProClarity. Furthermore, Panorama’s product is just too big for our needs and all of its administrative functionality, which includes user management, security and what-not, is just not necessary. Otherwise it looks nice.

Dundas

The Dundas OLAP Services OLAP grid is very usable – all the users need to do is drag and drop dimension hierarchies to browse the cubes they have access to. Unfortunately, it is a bit buggy and very slow when the cells, which need to be displayed, hit the > 10 000 range. After performance testing, we found out that about 50-80% of the processing time takes place on the client machines, where the browser renders a huge HTML table. It turns out that it is not only Dundas which has the same issues. Any HTML OLAP tool I tested suffers from exactly the same problem. This includes Dundas, BI Companion and Radar-Soft. Nothing we can do. Dundas supports paging, so the results can be split in a number of pages. It performs better if that feature is turned on, but requires hacking when exporting to Excel, because in order to export the whole grid, by default the user needs to export all the pages individually and then manually concatenate them in Excel. Since the HTML table problem cannot be rectified by Dundas or us, Dundas’s OLAP Services remain what they were intended to be – an interim solution.

ProClarity

Dated, but FAST. ProClarity still beats all other solutions with its performance. It was as fast as Excel and much, much faster than anything else. Although it lacks the apparent user-friendliness of some of the other solutions, it does allow users to conveniently browse OLAP cubes. Furthermore, it integrates well with PerformancePoint. Unfortunately, 6.2 is its last ever version. Whether its functionality gets implemented as a part of SharePoint 2010 is still to be announced by Microsoft. By the current way things look, ProClarity is still the best solution for ad-hoc OLAP browsing. It is stable and even though its installation is not quite smooth (e.g. requires IIS to be running gin 32bit mode), it does offer what most users would feel comfortable with. Its drawbacks are: tabbed interface, no drag-drop, and outdated graphics. Not perfect, but good enough. Oh, and it works with Firefox.

PerformancePoint

The Microsoft dashboarding tool offers an Analytics Grid part, which can be used for ad-hoc analysis. Unfortunately, it does not allow the users to add more dimension hierarchies on rows or columns. What is does well is drilling up or down the hierarchies and slicing by other hierarchies. Unfortunately this is hardly enough when it comes to full-featured ad-hoc reporting.

Radar-Soft

The small OLAP browser Radar-Soft is offering seems fast at a first glance. It would have been a nice small tool if it did not have one major problem – paging. It pages everything. It even creates a number of pages within cells. This improves performance but makes it impossible to use if we want to export a whole grid to Excel. I guess that some of the paging can be disabled, but I am quite sure that, since it is HTML, it will have the aforementioned issues with performance when it comes to displaying a relatively large HTML table.

Conclusion

The three HTML solutions – Radar-Soft, Dundas and BI Companion all had the same issue with performance. My guess is that there is no HTML solution which is faster, because in the end it comes to browser performance rather than MDX or .NET implementation.

Panorama with its Java and Flash versions is maybe a good solution for a full-featured dashboarding and reporting, but is a massive overkill for our circumstances. Also, it is not very user-friendly and not very fast.

PerformancePoint and ProClarity are my favourite and I believe that Microsoft’s offering provides the best capabilities for our users at least until something better comes from the Microsoft workshop. These integrate nicely with SharePoint and perform very well. While PerformancePoint is very user friendly, I would not say that for ProClarity. Hopefully in the future we will see nicer OLAP browsing by Microsoft based on these two tools.

A word about SilverLight and Excel

While SilverLight OLAP browsers are available by various software houses (most notable BI Companion has one in Beta), it is a relatively new technology and was not an option for me as it was not in my client’s SOE. Also, from my testing it does not seem like it is much faster than HTML, but definitely looks nicer.

Excel is, in my opinion, the best tool for browsing OLAP cubes inside the organisation. It is fast, and provides a rich set of analytics capabilities. There are a lot of discussions about Excel as a report authoring tool on various blogs, but I believe that for ad-hoc reporting there is nothing out there which beats Excel. Despite this, I could not recommend it to my client, as the solution is exposed to external users and letting them connect to our cubes directly though Excel is just impossible considering our security infrastructure. Also, Excel Services does not provide enough ad-hoc functionality, as it does not allow users to modify the Pivot Tables.

Wishes

I wish and hope that Microsoft releases a full-featured, user-friendly and performant OLAP browser as part of Visual Studio and .NET or as a part of SharePoint 2010. Such a tool is just a must and a serious miss in the Microsoft BI stack. The combination of Excel+PerformancePoint+ProClarity does the trick for now, but as ProClarity is getting discontinued, there must be something in the future toolset, which takes its place.

A few other bloggers wrote posts closely related to this topic:

Richard Lees – Which cube browser for Microsoft OLAP
Richard Lees – What’s preventing Excel from being the ubiquitous cube browser
Chris Webb – Proclarity Migration Roadmap (or lack thereof)

SSAS , , , , , , ,

 

Post-mortem thoughts on PerformancePoint Planning and the future of Microsoft BI planning and forecasting

January 24th, 2009
Comments Off

As everyone must be well aware by now, Microsoft has discontinued PerformancePoint Planning and has decided to merge Monitoring & Analytics into SharePoint as PerofrmancePoint Services. Chris Webb and Nick Barclay already blogged about this and gave us some valuable thoughts/explanations on the subject.

In addition to what has already been said, I would like to add that maybe dumping Planning will not be such a great loss to anyone. The current market penetration is marginal and the successful implementations are not that many anyway. I have seen companies considering PP Planning and then abandoning it because of the complexities involved which translate directly into a high implementation cost comparable to a .NET implementation.

From a simplistic technological point of view, planning and forecasting is allowing users to input data, then manipulating the data according to some business rules, and then adding it to their BI systems in order to analyse and compare things from the past to things in the future. Currently, we can do this by either building a custom application, which handles all this, or we can use a third-party application handling it for us. I have had the chance to be involved in each scenario (once with a team of .NET developers and a few times with Calumo, which allows cube write-back or stored procedure write-back from Excel). The difficulties always come from the fact that the knowledge needed to accurately gather requirements, obscured by layers of business logic, and the completely different nature of planning and forecasting in comparison with analytics.

Analytics, or core BI is based on the presumption that we already have reliable data, of which our business clients want to make sense, thus gaining insight into their business. Planning and forecasting, in contrast, also involves allowing these same users to record their thoughts about the business and their projections about the future, and then analyse those just like their historical data. Therefore, planning and forecasting is more complex than pure analytics.

There is no tool in the Microsoft BI stack which can completely cover the requirements for a typical  business planning scenario. PerformancePoint Planning tried to encapsulate the planning logic into a set of models and rules, but it was too complex for both users and developers to understand, implement and then maintain. I have seen a number of successful planning and forecasting implementations with a third-party tool – Calumo. It is a fairly simple application (at least in comparison to PP Planning), which apart from some quite handy improvements over Excel for report authoring, has the very powerful functionality to allow users to input data straight back to their OLAP source (cube write-back), or to their data warehouse (stored procedure write-back). That is all that is needed for any planning and forecasting project and Micorosft should really have a look at what their partners are offering as a solution to planning instead of developing monstrosities like PerformancePoint Planning.

Building on top of SQL Server stored procedures and Analysis Services write-back, Microsoft can easily enhance their BI offering. All we need is a way to access this functionality through a front-end tool like Excel, SharePoint or Reporting Services.

Note: A couple of techniques which may be useful for planning and forecasting implementations are discussed in these posts:
Spreading Non-Transactional Data Over Time
Moving writeback data in the Fact tables and avoiding problems with changing column names

Other , ,

 

Using blank ASCII character in PerformancePoint to avoid trimming

October 2nd, 2008
Comments Off

Recently I had a problem with a PerformancePoint filter, which got automatically trimmed. The filter was displaying a small custom cut of a hierarchy and the Business Analyst on the project wanted to see it always expanded in a simple single select drop-down instead of in a tree. The tree view was undesirable because the hierarchy was very small and clicking twice to get to the third level was too much for the users of the reports.

Unfortunately, indenting the drop-downs with blank spaces is not possible when using a List filter as PerformancePoint trims the items in it providing a flat list of names. Indenting with dashes or some other visible character is also usually not visually pleasing, and since there is no way to use rich text and color some of the characters in white, the only option is to use an invisible character which does not get trimmed.
Fortunately, there is such a character with an ASCII code of 255. It is a space-like character, which does not get trimmed by PerformancePoint in a List filter. Therefore, if we indent our list with ASCII-255 characters we achieve the goal of having nicely arranged list in a simple filter. Keeping Alt pressed and then typing 255 from the numeric keypad results in typing one such whitespace character.
As it is generally not a good practise to use the character in our code as distinguishing it from a space is not easy, it is advisable to provide a lot of comments around code fragments utilising it, including the way to type it.

PPS ,

 

Filtering Unneeded Dimension Members in PerformancePoint Filters

September 27th, 2008
Comments Off

Published on SQLServerCentral on the 2008-11-14:
http://www.sqlservercentral.com/articles/PerformancePoint/64565/
 

Sometimes we need to utilise dynamic dimension security in an Analysis Services solution and we also need to display dynamically the allowed members in a PerformancePoint filter. 

In case our hierarchy is multi-level and in case we can expect to have security on multiple levels, PerformancePoint will display the full path upwards to the root member of the dimension. So, in the case where in a Business Unit hierarchy we have access to some third level members, in PerformancePoint we will see all their parents. In example if our hierarchy looks like this: 

All Business Units
-Europe
–UK
—-France
—-Bulgaria
-North America
—-USA
—-Canada 

and we give someone access to France, they will in fact see: 

All Business Units
-Europe
—-France 

Indeed, when they select All Business Units or Europe they will still see only France data but this may be confusing. To eliminate the top levels we need to change the way we create our PerformancePoint filter. 

To achieve this, first we need to create a MDX Query filter. For more information about PerformancePoint filters and dynamic dimension security you can read the following brilliant post on Nick Barclay’s blog: PPS Data Connection Security with CustomData. Nick explains how to set up PerformancePoint to work with Analysis Services dynamic dimension security and related topics. I will now concentrate on actually filtering the members of the already set-up MDX Query filter. 

Instead of requesting all dimension members with a simple statement like: 

DESCENDANTS([Business].[Business Hierarchy].Members,, SELF_AND_AFTER) 

we can write some fairly simple MDX which means: 

Get me the descendants of all dimension members whose ascendants (excluding themselves) have no more than one child. 

And the MDX code is: 

 DESCENDANTS( FILTER([Business].[Business Hierarchy].Members AS a,   ((FILTER(ASCENDANTS(a.CurrentMember) AS a_asc,     a_asc.CurrentMember.CHILDREN.Count > 1).Count = 1)     And     a.CurrentMember.Children.Count > 1)   Or   ((FILTER(ASCENDANTS(a.CurrentMember) AS a_asc,     a_asc.CurrentMember.CHILDREN.Count > 1).Count = 0)     And     a.CurrentMember.Children.Count = 0)),,SELF_AND_AFTER) 

The result will be France being displayed as the only available member in the PerformancePoint drop-down. Also, if we had two different allowed members, the code above would show us the top common parent of the two. Therefore, if we had France and Canada as the allowed set of dimension members, the drop-down would consist of the following hierarchy: 

All Business Units
-Europe
—-France
-North America
—-Canada 

thus satisfying our requirements.

PPS, SSAS , ,