Limitation of the rows in UX

Hi There,

Can I limit the rows display in the Grid widget in UX?
I tried to use TopCount on the row of MDX, but the result is not my expectation because I already used Non Empty (Suppress Zero) on the row of MDX.
is there any way can do the row limitation?

Thanks,

Ronan

So you want to paginate?

I just would like to let users see a part of the data (there are over 3000 rows, limit them to see the top 1000)
But paginate is also ok, how can I do it on UX?

One option might be to use Head(Set_Expression [ ,Count ] ) on the rows set expression.

1 Like

I would also suggest the same. The only issue is that this will work great for non zero supressed views but once zero supression is switched on then the number of records displaying could be quite unpredictable.

Wanted to revive this old thread to see if anyone has found a good method to limit the rows returned by a MDX query in Apliqo, especially when we have stacked row dimensions.

Interesting in the Arc Cube Viewer, there is a “Max Rows” option to specify how many rows to return, which works well even with stacked row dimensions. When I try to peek under the hood to see the MDX in DevTools, I see the full MDX w/o any functions like “Head” to limit the rows. Does the full MDX get run on the Arc server but only a certain number of results are returned in the GUI? Not sure if there is any inspiration we can draw from how the Arc cube viewer does this.

The rest API allows for $top on rows and columns on the cellset which would be an easy way to allow pagination. However, the way the UX application is designed for all MDX queries the MDX is passed directly to the core canvas server which does the rest query. To bypass this and do a direct rest query using the same connection is possible but would require a redesign. Therefore this is something we will look to tackle with the new react build.

If the query doesn’t use non empty then you can use topcount, head, tail and subset functions on rows and columns. But if zero supression is being used on an axis then we don’t have a solution for this for now.

@cw-ch-scott, thanks for your detailed explanation on this, totally makes sense!