Over 50 tables in one universe? 1

[Patten]

Hello,

I would like to hear the opinion of some experts here on the forum. Is it a good choice to develop a universe containing over 50 tables or should one choose to develop several universes each containing +- 10-15 tables logically ordered following their contence? Because having a universe of over 50 tables seems to me complicating development of reports for users not very familiar with BO. On the other hand having more universes means more maintenance... It means as well if the designer of universes decides to not include some table in a universe, end -users have less flexibility, they cannot use this table because it is in another universe: or am I wrong with this statements: please some comment.

 

[skrandel]

It's not about how many tables there are. You should include similar business applications.

For example Bookings, Billings and Backlog all belong together in 1 universe. This may lead to over 50 tables.

If you needed to add HR data, it likely wouldn't need to be in the same universe because this data is not used together.

My rule of thumb is that if you add data into your universe that creates islands in your diagram, you should split the islands into their own universes.

Steve Krandel
Westbay Solutions

http://www.westbaysolutions.com

 

[Garethe]

Indeed, the more tables the better. Users will inevitably decide to try and link the data if any possible link exists. If they do this between universes you cannot see how it is being done, and trust me the first you'll hear of it is when the phone rings and someon starts telling you your Data Warehouse Data is all wrong ;-).

Within a universe you can control links with contexts & aliases and prevent the users from returning gibberish reports.

Yes complex universes can seem daunting to users at first, but try to structure the data in a clear & concise way, make sure you don't branch the data too many times at each level and use as many levels of sub-class as are required. If you structure your data in a way which follows the users logic in a clear & concise fashion, using names & terms familiar to the business area the universe is used by you shouldn't have too many problems.

Good luck & Happy Warehousing!

G.

 

[DrSmyth]

I'm with Skrandel all the way here, although I've only been doing universe design for the past year I have found that if i try and satisfy all my customers with a single universe then i get a lot of problems and cause myself a lot of bother trying to find anything.

The beauty of designing a universe for a particular business need is that they can always be expanded if more information is required. But if you've built a universe that is hard to maintain and offers too much choice to the end user (I've found that they tend to be an easily confused bunch regardless of what guidlines you give them or however intuitive you make your objects) and you try to trim it down then someone will doubtlessly be using an object that you've removed.

Not only that i find that smaller Universes designed for a particular business need allow me to be more specialised in the objects i create...

Don't know if the more experienced guys agree with me but that is the conclusion that i have come to after a year...

P.S, another thing worth bearing in mind is that if you are doing work on a universe thatn a smaller one will load and export to and from designer a lot quicker than a larger one...

 

[n5xjb]

Each of the answers is right. There is not just one way to go about this...

I am supportive of the universe for each business function approach. However, be careful that you do not fall into the trap of creating a universe for each new report request! This is a situation I have sen many times in the last 6 years where I have had to clean up the mess. the basic rule of thumb is to stick to having your business clearly defined with regard to functions, and you have the resulting base for how many and which universes you will require to accomodate the reporting community.