Controller integration with TM1

wcb79

Hi guys,

Could you tell me if there is any substantial difference regarding integration with TM1 between Controller versions 8.5 and 10.1?
If integration with TM1 were to be done, would you advice using 10.1 instead of 8.5?

Thanks!

酥糖公子

There is no integration with Controller 8.5!  You would have to buy TM1 separately and roll your own integration.

The latest version comes with FAP TM1 server out of the box.  IMO although this is integrated it isn't really "integrated" as to get decent and truly useful reporting off the top of TM1 a fair amount of custom development still needs to be done to create a more useful set of cubes and dimensions (that don't get blown away and recreated on every refresh of data from Controller). Still the OOTB integration is useful as it does cover off the task of sucking the raw data out.

hezi15826738412

We already have TM1 and now we plan to build the consolidation cube inside it from Controller using FAP.
The fact is that I've sen many PMs concerning FAP issues with Controller 8.5 version so i wonder if it wouldnt be easier for us to install 10.1 version. I suppose integration tasks using FAP will confront less obstacles don't you think so?

By the way, once the cube is transferred into TM1 using FAP, why can't I build reporting on it? how do I solve this issue?

Thanks

sunnypure

consoandreporting wrote:By the way, once the cube is transferred into TM1 using FAP, why can't I build reporting on it? how do I solve this issue?

You could build reporting directly off FAP using BI, or Excel or MDX but it wouldn't be very good, or perhaps I should say it wouldn't be anywhere near as good as it could be.  With FAP you just get one cube (which has fairly idiosyncratically named dimensions and not very well laid out in terms of ease of use for end users) and in terms of cube viewer analysis and reporting it is not user friendly as the cube is destroyed and recreated with each FAP load.  My understanding from the controler product manager at the time was that they built it this way to ensure no risk of the FAP cube ever not being in sync with Contributor, but still IMO this makes it not very user friendly and seems a bit 1/2 baked.  So to cut is short if you want to do any real reporting then using the FAP cube and its dimensiosn as datasources and building a set of permanent reporting cubes with sensible dimension and cube names, versioning and drill-through back to the controller tables makes a lot more sense.

kbswangyang

Concerning the account hierarchies in Controller, how are they handled when transferred to TM1 via FAP?  Is an account hierarchy created on TM1 based on each of the summation account rules? Doest it mean that the limit to hanlde account hierarchies transfer from Controller to TM1 is set to three hierarchies?

If I had a fourth account hierarchy which i needed also in TM1, what is the recommended way of proceeding?

Thanks