Greetings Franco,
The Vendor table is not considered a good candidate for Incremental Loading as it is likely not very large and shouldn't have a very large amount of change day to day. The tables that we typically include in incremental loading are the G/L Entry, Value Entry and the Detailed Customer and Vendor Ledger entry tables. In fact, your VLE (which doesn't seem to be incrementally loading now) should actually be the table in your example that should have incremental loading turned on.
Additionally, I am curious why you would have the posting date on the Vendor table, primarily because this is a Master record table as opposed to a transaction table. If you have not adjusted the order of the tables from the Standard Project, the VLE is far below the Vendor, so in a standard execution, the posting date would never be populated on the Vendor table as it is processed first. We don't recommend adjusting the order of tables in the Standard project due to the fact that ordering is so important in processing.
Unless it is vital for your project, I would remove the Posting Date from the Vendor table. I would also recommend turning Incremental Loading off for the Vendor table and potentially on for the VLE. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Date
Votes
3 comments
-
Jet Reports Historic Posts Official comment Can you please help me understand what is the difference between ADO.NET Transfer and Data Cleansing rules?
The transfer step copies data from the source to the _R table. The cleansing rules (stored procedure) then transforms that data and populated the _V table.
The link below detail each step in the execution process.
http://jetreportskb.host4kb.com/article/AA-00987
I have decided not to enable incremental loading on masters.
Enable Target based incremental on non posted transaction tables and source based incremental on posted transaction tables. -
Jet Reports Historic Posts Dear All,
We have implemented the incremental loading on most of the tables in staging as well as in DW.
We are facing an issue to populate the transformed fields in the incremental mode.
The following scenario can be explained using the Vendor table.
The Vendor table has posting date from vendor ledger entry table. We have implemented the incremental load on the vendor table.
Now we have simulated a simple execution package wherein we are executing the tables in the following way
Vendor(Incremental)->Vendor Ledger Entry->Vendor(Incremental)
1. When the vendor table is executed in the above sequence the posting date is populated as blank. The reason being when the Vendor table is executed first time (We have deployed the vendor table in full load table mode) the Vendor ledger entry is blank hence the posting date is populated as blank.
2. Now when the Vendor Ledger entry table is executed the posting date is populated in vendor ledger entry table.
3. When the vendor is executed for the second time it gets executed in the incremental mode and hence doesn’t find in the any new records on the basis of the timestamp for the same day execution.
Therefore the posting date will still not be populated as the JDM will find no change in the Vendor table and the transformation fails in this case to populate the values in the posting date field of vendor table.
Can you please help us on this?
Thanks,
Franco. -
Jet Reports Historic Posts Dear JoshJet,
Thank you for your answer. The example which I had stated in my question was on pilot basis and not actual implementation but still I will consider your suggestion.
Basically my problem is when I execute Vendor-Vendor ledger entry-Vendor (Cleansing rules) the data gets populated in the posting date column even for the incremental mode.
Can you please help me understand what is the difference between ADO.NET Transfer and Data Cleansing rules?
Also is there any drawback if add incremental rule on Vendor or Customer Master tables?
I came across a weird scenario when my customer table doesn't get executed for the very first time but gets execute subsequent time.
I have implemented incremented loading on it.Is that causing the problem?
Thanks,
Franco.
Please sign in to leave a comment.