Does WRS team read and evaluate new feature suggestions here?
We have stucked many times that current "synchronized objects/independent objects" functionality is very limited (even in v4.2)
If you select "synchronized objects", your tables and graph get all filters/drillings in common, on all dimensions. If you select "independent objects", they have all filters/drillings independent.
Actually, such synced objects are only helpful if it is, for example, one table and one graph: you drill the table, the graph follows up.
It would be very helpful to be able to set up "patial sync": some dimensions get synced, while others permit independent filtering/drilling (or at least filtering).
There are many real customer cases which require it. Simple examples below. You have a cube over 3 dimensions (Date, Geo, Product) and 1 measure (Amount).
1. You place one table (or graph) with total amount dynamics over time (Geo: rows, Date&Amount: columns). And below you place table (or graph) with detailed data on products over the last week (so, Geo:rows, Product&Amount: columns, Date: filter). When the user drills geography, he wants to get drilled on both objects, but the date filter on the second object shouldn't affect the first. You can't implement it on current WRS.
2. You place one table with total amounts on geographies (Geo: rows, Date&Amount: columns), and below 6 graphs with performance on specific regions (filters on Geo). When the user drills date, he wants to get drilled on all objects, but the geo filters on graphs should not affect the total table. You can't implement it on current WRS.
It seems to me that support for such feature (independent sync settings on different data items) doesn't contradict with solution architecture (does it?), and should not be too hard to implement.
Did you consider such feature? Are there any plans to implement it?
Message was edited by: SPGremlin
Message was edited by: SPGremlin
