Hi,
My environment is BI4.1 SP2.5. Users have complained about reports requiring the selection of Context when refreshing a report, which was not required in the XI3.1 (sp3) environment. These are reports using upgraded UNV universes (still UNV, not converted to UNX). This is quite problematic as it means they cannot schedule the reports, and often are unsure which context to choose.
After further investigation we discovered some inconsistency in the behaviour of the Universe parameter COMPARE_CONTEXTS_WITH_JOINS. When viewing the parameters in Universe Design Tool, the COMPARE_CONTEXTS_WITH_JOINS is set to Yes, which is the default. My understanding of this parameter is that if a report is using objects that can be sourced from more than one context in the Universe, then it will check and if there is no difference in the generated SQL regardless of the context chosen then the user will not be prompted to select a context (simply because it would make no difference which path is chosen). Sensible, and not quite sure why anybody would want to set this No.
This was tested using a simple query on the universe, selecting objects from two or more tables, but objects that exist in more than one defined context. In 3.1 the behaviour is as expected. However in 4.1 the user is required to select the context on refresh.
Further investigation revealed that by setting the COMPARE_CONTEXTS_WITH_JOINS in the Universe to No instead of Yes, it resolved the problem!
It would therefore seem that the parameter is working in the complete opposite manner to how it should be. We are quite concerned though about switching it to No, worried if there may be other impacts given this unexpected behaviour.
Have also tested this in a 4.1 SP3.1 environment, and the behaviour is as per XI3.1, i.e. it is functioning as expected. So it appears to have been fixed.
Unfortunately we are not in a position at this point in time to upgrade to SP3, so I am curious if there is anyone else out there who can replicate this in their 4.1 environment. I am going to upgrade my Dev environment to 2.6, just to see if it has been resolved. I have searched and have not found anyone else who has experienced this issue, or any discussions along this line, which I find very surprising. I am also in the process of raising it with SAP, but in the meantime, any input would be appreciated.
Thanks,
Daniel.