Hi,
I have this problem at hand and I hope if someone can help me with
it. I have a P-C dimension with 7 possible levels. Now the problem is,
at some level the 64K parent-child member limit can be exceeded. I
have searched Google KB for this issue and was excited to find some
solutions like using Member Groups, upgrading memory, restructuring to
a regular dimension, VLDMs, and upgrading to the 64-bit version of
AS2000, but non of them seemed "formal" (documented), acceptable or
feasible. Can someone plz give me more insight about this? Btw, I
haven't run into this problem yet, that's breaking the 64K limit and
in some posts some said it doesn't even exist. It's just a design
issue and I want to take care of it before I start building the cube.

TIA
Peter

If you have this many members in a parent child dimension and you know that
you will have at most 7 levels, then I would recommend that you change it to
a regular standard dimension and use the "hide member if" functionality.
You can also use the auto grouping feature to get around the limitation of
only 64K children per parent.

Sean


--
--
Sean Boon
SQL Server BI Product Unit

**This posting is provided AS IS, with no warranties, and confers no
rights.**

"Pete" <peter (AT) aucegypt (DOT) edu> wrote

Thanks Sean for your reply, just one more question, and this might
turn out to be a very silly one, but how do you turn on the "auto
grouping" feature for a P-C dimension? A parent-child dimension
according to BOL "is defined with a single level of a special type
that usually produces multiple levels seen by end users". Although a
P-C dimension is by default a changing one, yet the "Grouping" feature
is not even there in its properties. Probably because - and again
according to BOL - "You cannot create member groups in a dimension's
top or bottom level." And since a P-C dimension has in fact only one
level, I guess that level is considered the "top" and "bottom" level.
I also guess in a P-C dimension I can't use the workaround of adding a
"dummy" level. So, am I missing something here?

thx

"Sean Boon [MS]" <seanboon (AT) online (DOT) microsoft.com> wrote