About jtkerlin

jtkerlin · ‎05-12-2022

Fantastic news, thank you for the link and heads up on this.

jtkerlin · ‎05-04-2022

This has been submitted to Support, and it is now on the roadmap for fix/correction.

jtkerlin · ‎04-07-2022

I installed 4.4 and had the same issues for a couple weeks, then they resolved themselves for just over 2 weeks and returned. Since then the company has moved to Microsoft 365, I installed and loaded 4.4 again and have the same issue. I have an open ticket with support. What is strange is that this specific view works fine with one of our models, the same view on the other model (different countries) has this issue. All of the rest of the views we use regularly work without issue. The problematic view is smaller in cell size when it finally pulls up (after 11 minutes). It is hit/miss with users - some encounter this issue, others have no issue at all. The underly module is slightly larger with the problem view than the one that works fine.

jtkerlin · ‎03-31-2022

I will do so, I have not yet

jtkerlin · ‎03-31-2022

Recently this changed so that when you use the native Compare functionality in Anaplan classic, it no longer shows the name of what you are comparing to, but shows as "undefined". Previously this would have shown the name - in the screen shot, instead of "undefined" it would have noted the name of the version I was comparing to, which was Forecast Working. I have attached a screen shot of what shows. This Compare function is under Format option section.

jtkerlin · ‎03-02-2022

Thanks for taking a look, we only started using the Compare functionality as well and ran into this when playing with NUX vs Classic.

jtkerlin · ‎03-01-2022

I am convinced that this Add-in is trying to make me go insane. Currently (at least for the last hour), this Saved View is now working without issue. I am leery to say that it is resolved, because the last two times I did after it worked, it stopped working again.

jtkerlin · ‎03-01-2022

Three screen shots attached. 1) NUX with layout - first is dynamic, second is static and third should be dynamic with compare static. The second one is staying static, however the compare to one is not working - it is just showing/pulling what the first dynamic/page selection is. 2) Settings for last grid- compare to. I do not have it as not sync, because I do want the values to change based on what the page selection is - but it should retain the same compare to base version (which was Forecast Working in the saved View) 3) How it looks in classic - first dynamic, second static, third dynamic with compare static. Works as expected - same selections as what was done in NUX.

jtkerlin · ‎03-01-2022

I removed 4.3 and installed 4.4 and am encountering the same issue. What is strange is that it is (so far) a single specific module/view that is giving me this bad experience. I seem have issues with it and a couple others do, but most have no issue at all. I tried with Universal, SSO and no SSO and it acts the same. Is there any reason why a specific view would have issues, but others would not? Previously I encountered this with VERY large ones (over 1M cells). I have successfully done both larger and smaller (by cell count) modules and views without the same issues I am getting on this one. The largest I have tried is roughly twice as large (360k cells vs around 160k cells) and it worked fast and as expected. I have repaired MS Office, repaired the 4.4 Add in install as well as deactivated all of the add-ins I can. The one I cannot is McAfee DLP (but this is something that my counterparts have and do not run into this problem).

jtkerlin · ‎03-01-2022

I did not see anything noting that this functionality will not work in NUX (https://help.anaplan.com/8f273e26-5b54-4f5b-b75a-e7f2f57d010e-Compare-data). We have several saved views set up for CSR Walk, using those saved views in NUX results in the same values for each. First grid - showing Compare From start as Actual (dynamic by user selection) Second grid - showing Forecast (static does not change for user) Third grid - using and showing Compare to Forecast (Compare to is static, but the Compare from is dynamic) In classic, it works correctly, however in NUX it is syncing all of the grids to the version selector choice, even by using the saved view locking in on the compare to forecast, as well as locking in the second grid to show ONLY Forecast Working. The Compare saved view is changing to show the regular grid value of what version is selected. It is not retaining the Compare to functionality. If I change to ONLY show Forecast Working - it shows only what Forecast Working is, not the compare to amounts.

jtkerlin · ‎02-28-2022

I saw that 4.4 is wide release on March 3rd. I will update to that version and test then, thank you.

jtkerlin · ‎02-25-2022

Thank you for the notes and references.

jtkerlin · ‎02-25-2022

@MagaliP can you help/advise on this? Is there a way to deactivate these pop ups? They seem to show when it takes longer for the retrieve/refresh.

jtkerlin · ‎01-28-2022

After actually timing it - it was taking between 15 and 17 minutes. I did discover one thing, that I had two versions of 4.3 installed. I have uninstalled, rebooted, reinstalled one and rebooted and it is a bit faster, but still takes around 10 minutes to connect and create a new retrieve or refresh an existing retrieve when starting from a new Excel session. Once I am connected and after that 10 minute wait, all new retrieves/refreshes in that file are very fast - pulling within 60 seconds (most far less than that).

jtkerlin · ‎01-27-2022

Today especially, but also fairly frequently when using the Excel Add in, we get this error "Microsoft Excel is waiting for another application to complete an OLE action". It seems to trigger within 30-60 seconds of a new connection and will continually pop up each time you close it - roughly every 30 seconds. You can leave the error and eventually the Add in goes to the next step, but not until after over 10 minutes of waiting. This is occurring once clicking on Next, after selecting the Workspace, Model and Module/View, before getting to the screen that shows the cell count and you need to click Finish. In the last one I did - it shows just over 94,000 cells (well within the 1M cell problem range), so it does not seem to be a size issue.

jtkerlin · ‎01-11-2022

Not sure - what is a BOM? (the web tells me "bill of materials") We are doing sevice revenue planning/budgeting at monthly and quarterly checkpoints. Our current tool was created by an outside consultant, we are changing/updating some things as we need based business data/processes we first believed to be true but were not. We have to change what data sources are coming into HUB so that we can have be more relevant and timely information for various countries. When the tool was created I had zero knowledge of Anaplan, over the last twelve or so months my understanding has improved, and now it is seeing how things were done and whether they still make sense or not.

jtkerlin · ‎01-11-2022

This is a little different, for our planning hierarchy we want to only create hierarchy levels or intersections where there is activity. The L4 is the lowest level - Product, a Product can exist in many L3s (Department) and which can exist in may L2s. The string code that would be related to a specific L2, L3 and L4 would be unique, but the L4 itself (outside of the entire string) can exist none, once or many times. It seems like similar logic that you showed would apply. Sorry for the more basic question and clarification, but I am not naturally a coder or developer so still trying to wrap my head around that type of thinking and within Anaplan.

jtkerlin · ‎01-11-2022

These are great questions and something that we are currently evaluating. I am sure that everything I am noting will sound familiar. I do not recall why exactly we had transactional level data coming in rather than aggregated at some other level. There are a couple other aspects of our tool that need a slightly lower level than what we are planning at (auto tagging of variances and things), but that level will be higher than each transactional level. The tool is for planning revenue by client, department and product. We currently have the transactional data to build the hierarchy and ingest the revenues at the L1-L4 levels. The hierarchy and PY and current year revenues are all that are used as the starting point from our billing system, then in Planning we layer on Forecast, Budget and variance explanations (which is only down to the L4 level). One of the reasons why we have data coming into Hub that is subsequently not being used/ingested to Planning is due to inflexibility of changes to the incoming data feed. It can take 1-2 months to have the data feed changed/adjusted when things change, so we are filtering out the irrelevant data in Anaplan instead to increase our flexibility. Currently we do not have a need in Anaplan for this data, but that could change and we would end up with timing issues to get the data feed adjusted accordingly. To put into different words, I believe you are suggesting to us the L4 code string and extract out the various layers that would be needed to create the hierarchies (sort of going backward from detail to highest level roll up, rather than the opposite). Thank you for the links, I will be viewing shortly.

jtkerlin · ‎01-11-2022

Order Lists is extremely helpful (https://help.anaplan.com/anapedia/Content/Modeling/Build%20Models/Actions/Order-list.html) but we have a couple key lists that are over 1 million items, so Order Lists does not work for them. We are looking at around 11 million items for current year and prior year data. We have transactions that are feeding into HUB from our source system, that come in based upon a transaction number. This module/list is what we use to create our hierarchy levels. It was created with First Occurrence as a boolean to determine what the first instance was to create the various hierarchy levels (L1, L2, L3 and L4). The issue is that there are some L3 items we want to exclude from going creating a hierarchy; however that same item may also be the first instance of L1 and L2 - meaning if we exclude it, our hierarchy for L1 and L2 is not set up, so any "valid" hierarchies at those levels will not be created. What are some other options to get the proper hierarchy created?; while not creating hierarchy levels for items that will ultimately have no activity because they are being excluded by the L3 exclusion. See attached for visual examples of what we want to accomplish. Example 1 shows excess hierarchies being created that will never be used - increasing sparcity and space consumption. Example 2 shows issue if first item is first occurrence of L1 - no hierarchies created. Example 3 shows how L2 that are needed would not be created. Example 4 shows what we want to happen - hierarchies without L3 exclusions would be created and no unnecessary hierarchies would be created.

jtkerlin · ‎12-01-2021

This is a user experience challenge in both classic and NUX. In classic there looks to be a limitation on the number of items in a list when that selector stops acting with the +/- expansion options and shows only as expanded. In NUX this is the situation for ALL hierarchy lists regardless of size. It is a much nicer user experience for users to be able to expand/collapse items in the selectors than showing them everything. In most instances users are looking for a specific L2 and then want to see its respective L3 and L4. It is rare when they want to see everything, especially with massive lists. I am only including screen shots of short lists, however it is easy to see how overwhelming the current view can be with the entire hierarchy expanded out.

jtkerlin · ‎12-01-2021

Same issue here, the tree hierarchy is far more user friendly, especially on massively large lists.

jtkerlin · ‎10-15-2021

This is how we have it, with a boolean to show only the lowest level - L4, however clicking on an item in the grid at this level does not change what the selector shows, however all other selectors that are at the L4 level all sync to show the item selected. It seems to be a bug.

jtkerlin · ‎10-14-2021

The page selector and the selector on other grids is updating as items are clicked on, however the selector on the same grid is not updating. L1 is Country, L2 is Client, L3 is Department, L4 is Product The selectors are all at our L4 level, so I would have expected the selector on that grid to be updated to show which L4 was selected, in the screen shot I would have expected it to show "Legal Expense" rather than staying at the L1 Level.

jtkerlin · ‎10-13-2021

My limited understanding is that this is being worked on, I have heard potentially mid 2022.

jtkerlin · ‎10-13-2021

My experience is if you have nested dimensions and want to show different items for different pieces you MUST use a Saved View. Example: MTD YTD Client PY Revenue CY Revenue Variance Variance Because you have different line items against MTD and YTD list, currently this is impossible to create in NUX from Custom View.

jtkerlin · ‎10-11-2021

Thank you @M.Kierepka This sounds correct, however I am relatively new to Anaplan, so forgive me some dumb questions to clarify. I suspect that this will help me clear up some other challenges we are facing as it is likely a critical piece of that I do not yet fully understand. The Territory format is a list, how does Anaplan connect that Territory to the value that is in the L3 Product attribute? Is this same list that is in the L3 Product attribute and that is where the linkage occurs? 1) Values from Dep Level using loop by parent - I believe I have this - I have the Territory level information showing on a line item at the L3 Product level based on what it is on the L2 Department it is part of. 2) This creates a user filter for the criteria of Territory? If I want to just leave it open and not apply to users, so they would use Quick or regular filter on the module will that work as well?

jtkerlin · ‎10-11-2021

We have three planning levels and want to be able to filter based upon an attribute of one to show all three. L1 - Client L2 - Department L3 - Product The attribute we want to filter by is Territory, which is determined based upon the L2 Department Level. I think that this is a dimensionality issue and there is not a solution, however wanted to see if someone else has encountered as similar situation and created a resolution. Example: Client Department Product Territory ABC Corp Central, West Dept1 Central Prod1 Central Dept2 West Prod1 West Client/Department/Product would be using the L3 List. A client can have multiple departments so is not limited to a single Territory, a Department can have multiple Products, but Products gets the Territory from the Department. We cannot use the Summary method of First or Last due to Clients can have multiple Departments - it would result in missing at least half of the instances depending on which is chosen (more if a client had activity in more than two Departments with different Territories). We have managed to use x[TEXTLIST:y] to get the values from L3 Product to accumulate at L1 Client. However cannot get the L2 Department to have a value, nor have a single line item that would have these values for all three planning Levels, so that a user could filter on that single line item. In this example - the user would filter Territory by Central and be able to see ABC Corp, Dept1 and Prod1 that had Central.

jtkerlin · ‎07-01-2021

Thank you, I knew there was something we were not thinking through by doing the shortcut of just putting comma and semicolon as the separator.

jtkerlin · ‎06-30-2021

I noticed that you can have comma and semicolon clicked at the same time in the load file settings. Is there a best practices for this - to do it in one grouping or to create two separate actions?

jtkerlin · ‎06-08-2021

Thank you very much for your help.