Tag Archives: 1

An Introduction to Data Blending – Part 1 (Introduction, Visual Analysis Life-cycle)

Readers:

Today I am beginning a multi-part series on data blending.

  • Parts 1, 2 and 3 will be an introduction and overview of what data blending is.
  • Part 4 will review an illustrative example of how to do data blending in Tableau.
  • Part 5 will review an illustrative example of how to do data blending in MicroStrategy.

I may also include a Part 6, but I have to see how my research on this topic continues to progress over the next week.

Much of Parts 1, 2 and 3 are based on a research paper written by Kristi Morton from The University of Washington (and others) [1].

Please review the source references, at the end of each blog post in this series, to be directed to the source material for additional information.

I hope you find this series helpful for your data visualization needs.

Best Regards,

Michael

Introduction

Tableau and MicroStrategy’s new Analytics Platform are commercial business intelligence (BI) software tools that support interactive, visual analysis of data. [1]

Using a Web-based visual interface to data and a focus on usability, these tools enable a wide audience of business partners (IT’s end-users) to gain insight into their datasets. The user experience is a fluid process of interaction in which exploring and visualizing data takes just a few simple drag-and-drop operations (no programming skills or DB experience is required). In this context of exploratory, ad-hoc visual analysis, we will explore a feature originally introduced in Tableau in 2006, and in MicroStrategy’s new Analytics Platform v9.4.1 late last year (2013).

We will examine how we can integrate large, heterogeneous data sources. This feature is called data blending, which gives users the ability to create data visualization mashups from structured, heterogeneous data sources dynamically without any upfront integration effort. Users can author visualizations that automatically integrate data from a variety of sources, including data warehouses, data marts, text files, spreadsheets, and data cubes. Because data blending is workload driven, we are able to bypass many of the pain points and uncertainty in creating mediated schemas and schema-mappings in current pay-as-you-go integration systems.

The Cycle of Visual Analysis

Unlike databases, our human brains have limited capacity for managing and making sense of large collections of data. In database terms, the feat of gaining insight in big data is often accomplished by issuing aggregation and filter queries (producing subsets of data).

However, this approach can be time-consuming. The user is forced to complete the following tasks.

  1. Figure out what queries to write.
  2. Write the queries.
  3. Wait for the results to be returned back in textual format. And, then finally,
  4. Read through these textual summaries (often containing thousands of rows) to search for interesting patterns or anomalies.

Tools like Tableau and MicroStrategy help bridge this gap by providing a visual interface to the data. This approach removes the burden of having to write queries. The user can ask their questions through visual drag-and-drop operations (again, no queries or programming experience required). Additionally, answers are displayed visually, where patterns and outliers can quickly be identified.

Visualizations leverage the powerful human visual system to help us effectively digest large amounts of information and disseminate it quicker.

Cycle of Visual Analysis

Image: Kristi Morton, Ross Bunker, Jock Mackinlay, Robert Morton, and Chris Stolte, Dynamic Workload Driven Data Integration in Tableau. [1]

Figure 1, above, illustrates how visualization is a key component in turning information into knowledge and knowledge into wisdom.

Ms. Morton discusses the process as follows,

The process starts with some task or question that a knowledge worker (shown at the center) seeks to gain understanding. In the first stage, the user forages for data that may contain relevant information for their analysis task. Next, they search for a visual structure that is appropriate for the data and instantiate that structure. At this point, the user interacts with the resulting visualization (e.g. drill down to details or roll up to summarize) to develop further insight.

Once the necessary insight is obtained, the user can then make an informed decision and take action. This cycle is centered around and driven by the user and requires that the visualization system be flexible enough to support user feedback and allow alternative paths based on the needs of the user’s exploratory tasks. Most visualization tools, however, treat this cycle as a single, directed pipeline, and offer limited interaction with the user. Moreover, users often want to ask their analytical questions over multiple data sources. However, the task of setting up data for integration is orthogonal to the analysis task at hand, requiring a context switch that interrupts the natural flow of the analysis cycle. We extend the visual analysis cycle with a new feature called data blending that allows the user to seamlessly combine and visualize data from multiple different data sources on-the-fly. Our blending system issues live queries to each data source to extract the minimum information necessary to accomplish the visual analysis task.

Often, the visual level of detail is at a coarser level than the data sets. Aggregation queries, therefore, are issued to each data source before the results are copied over and joined in Tableau’s local in-memory view. We refer to this type of join as a post-aggregate join and find it a natural fit for exploratory analysis, as less data is moved from the sources for each analytical task, resulting in a more responsive system.

Finally, Tableau’s data blending feature automatically infers how to integrate the datasets on-the-fly, involving the user only in resolving conflicts. This system also addresses a few other key data integration challenges, including combining datasets with mismatched domains or different levels of detail and dirty or missing data values. One interesting property of blending data in the context of a visualization is that the user can immediately observe any anomalies or problems through the resulting visualization.

These aforementioned design decisions were grounded in the needs of Tableau’s typical BI user base. Thanks to the availability of a wide-variety of rich public datasets from sites like data.gov, many f Tableau’s users integrate data from external sources such as the Web or corporate data such as internally-curated Excel spreadsheets into their enterprise data warehouses to do predictive, what-if analysis.

However, the task of integrating external data sources into their enterprise systems is complicated. First, such repositories are under strict management by IT departments, and often IT does not have the bandwidth to incorporate and maintain each additional data source. Second, users often have restricted permissions and cannot add external data sources themselves. Such users cannot integrate their external and enterprise sources without having them collocated.

An alternative approach is to move the data sets to a data repository that the user has access to, but moving large data is expensive and often untenable. We therefore architected data blending with the following principles in mind: 1) move as little data as possible, 2) push the computations to the data, and 3) automate the integration challenges as much as possible, involving the user only in resolving conflicts.

Next: Data Blending Overview

——————————————————————————————————–

References:

[1] Kristi Morton, Ross Bunker, Jock Mackinlay, Robert Morton, and Chris Stolte, Dynamic Workload Driven Data Integration in Tableau, University of Washington and Tableau Software, Seattle, Washington, March 2012, http://homes.cs.washington.edu/~kmorton/modi221-mortonA.pdf.

Dr. Dobbs Journal: The Corruption of Agile – Part 1 of 3

Readers:

I have been in the Computer Science / Information Technology / Management Information Systems profession a long time. There are times when I need to take a break from all of the noise going on in our profession and revisit words and thoughts from the people I consider my mentors. These are the people who helped me become a better programmer, a better thinker, and learn to question everything.

One of my favorite magazines that I have read since my early days in this profession is Dr. Dobbs Journal. Reading articles in this wonderful magazine from many of the thought leaders (e.g., Scott W. Ambler, Allen Holub, Bruce Eckel, Larry O’Brien, Dave Thomas, Andrew Koenig, etc.), who taught courses early on at various conventions I have attended during my actual computer language programming days (e.g., C, C++, Java), remind me of the principles and personal practices I have let slip or ignore with all of our new drag-n-drop GUI-related tools.

Andrew BinstockI came across this article from Andrew Binstock (photo right), who is the Editor in Chief of Dr. Dobbs Journal. Prior to joining Dr. Dobb’s Journal, Andrew Binstock worked as a technology analyst, as well as a columnist for SD Times, a reviewer for InfoWorld, and the editor of UNIX Review. Earlier, he was a senior manager at Price Waterhouse. He began his career in software development in the early 1980’s.

I have included Mr. Binstock’s recent editorial about his concerns about how we are corrupting Agile in it’s entirety below. In Parts 2 and 3 of this series, I will explore some interesting thoughts about the Agile Manifesto and an interesting technique developed by Dave Thomas to continuously improve our programming skills.

Best Regards,

Michael

The Corruption of Agile

by Andrew Binstock, Editor in Chief, Dr. Dobbs Journal

What was intended as a set of personal practices has become a doctrine. And despite the mainstream adoption of Agile, the loss of its original intent has undermined its effectiveness.

Many people over the years have discussed their distress with the religious tone that cloaks the implementation of Agile practices. Particularly from the testing side of the world, there is a lot of “should,” “should not,” and “can do better next time” dialogue that sounds more like a man trying to fix ethical lapses than a developer writing code. When I speak with adherents of test-driven development (TDD) in particular, there is a seeming non-comprehension that truly excellent, reliable code was ever developed prior to the advent of this one practice. I sense their view that the long history of code that put man on the moon, ran phone switches, airline reservation systems, and electric grids was all the result of luck or unique talents, rather than the a function of careful discipline and development rigor.The disconnect between today’s Agile view and earlier reality is equally evident in the wanton bashing of the waterfall model. To get any programmer today to adopt your recommendation, simply state that not doing so is just a new way of doing waterfall. Watch his toes curl despite never having used waterfall, nor seemingly having any awareness that it served the industry really well for decades. What, was everyone in that bygone era a fool?Alan Kay was entirely right when he said that programming today has become a pop culture: “Pop culture is all about identity and feeling like you’re participating. It has nothing to do with cooperation, the past or the future — it’s living in the present. I think the same is true of most people who write code for money. They have no idea where [their culture came from] — and the Internet was done so well that most people think of it as a natural resource like the Pacific Ocean, rather than something that was man-made. When was the last time a technology with a scale like that was so error-free?”

It will pain some readers to know that the vast, error-free Internet predates Agile and even predates TDD. Crazy, right?

What I’m saying here is certainly not new. The fascination with today’s way of doing things and the view that it is the one true path to good code is a seemingly permanent part of the programming culture. But it has been greatly abetted by the legions of Agile consultants. By stressing the practices, they have corrupted what Agile was about. It’s important to remember that the Agile manifesto stated values, not practices. Immediately, though, values were translated into programming practices by consultants and, quickly, the former was lost. One of the original formulators of the manifesto, Dave Thomas, whom I interviewed this week, states his realization that a month after the manifesto was written it was already being corrupted: “…it got immediately productized in many different ways. The whole point, to my mind, of the Agile Manifesto is that it’s a set of personal practices that may scale to team level. You do not need a consultant to show you how to do that. It may help to have someone facilitate, but you do not need a consultant. And yet immediately what happened was that everyone and their dog hung out an Agile shingle and the whole thing turned into a branding exercise.”

What’s interesting in Thomas’s account is the view that Agile was a personal practice. Implicit is a personal way of orienting oneself towards a development process that accepts, even welcomes, change.

By pure coincidence, Allen Holub has been driving this point home in several blog posts, the most recent of which is a brilliant little piece that reminds us that Agile is a culture, not a set of practices. As he has previously explained, just because an organization is using scrum, doesn’t mean it’s Agile. He could have said the same thing about TDD, continuous integration, pair programming, or the like.

Whether a site is Agile or not depends on its culture. Does the culture support the personal values of the manifesto? If so, it’s Agile, if not, then it’s doing something else. So, indeed you could have a fully Agile site without TDD, continuous integration, or scrum. Likewise, you can have a site that uses all three practices, but cannot adapt to changes and is wholly inflexible in its work — so, not at all Agile. Yeah, I know, crazy, right?

Next: What the Agile Manifesto Really Said

———————————————————————————–

Source: Andrew Binstock, The Corruption of Agile, Dr. Dobbs Journal, March 18, 2014, http://www.drdobbs.com/architecture-and-design/the-corruption-of-agile/240166698.

Andrew Binstock can be reached at alb@drdobbs.com or via Twitter at platypusguy

Interview Question #1: MicroStrategy Generated SQL

Readers:

Today, I am going to introduce a new blog entry related to Interview Questions. I have interviewed a lot of people for various MicroStrategy positions over the years and thought I would share with you some of the questions I have asked or have been asked on interviews. I will try to add two interview questions a month.

Best regards,

Michael

Question

Why does the SQL you created using MicroStrategy (assume it generated a single-pass SQL) produce different results than when you run it directly against a database?

Answer

There may have been steps that required the analytical engine which would only occur on the Intelligence Server and not when you directly run SQL against a database.

Bryan Redux #1: Left Joins in MicroStrategy

Readers:

I am occasionally going to re-blog posts from my friend, Bryan Brandow’s MicroStrategy site.

I consider Bryan one of the best in the business, but his passions lie in other areas these days.

I will denote these blogs by beginning them with “Bryan Redux.” If you want to visit Bryan old site, the URL is http://www.bryanbrandow.com.

Best Regards,

Michael

Bryan posted this on Tuesday, March 22, 2011.

Left Joins in MicroStrategy

Bryan BrandowAn interesting stance by MicroStrategy is that they really push you for proper warehouse modeling (or at least what they consider proper).  At the same time, the tool’s flexibility can really handle just about any model, and I’ve seen the SQL Engine come through in some amazing scenarios where other vendors laughed and walked out.  One commonly requested feature is the ability to left join two tables in a report.  That is, left join Dimension to Fact, not left joining multiple passes.  There are plenty of valid reasons you would need this feature, and for many years I would joke “MicroStrategy can do everything .. except Left Joins”.  Imagine my surprise when I discovered an extremely buried feature that does enable left joins!  I stumbled on this a several months ago and have no idea if it’s been there all along or was introduced recently.  Based on forum and friend activity, not many other people are aware of it either.  Today, I’ll show you the secret.

Build a normal report with Attribute1, Attribute2 and a Metric.  The SQL will come out like this:

select a12.Attribute1  Attribute1, a13.Attribute2  Attribute2, sum(a11.Fact)  Metric

from FactTable a11 join DimAttribute1 a12

on (a11.Attribute1Key = a12.Attribute1Key)

join DimAttribute2 a13   on (a11.Attribute2Key = a13.Attribute2Key)

group by a12.Attribute1, a13.Attribute2

But let’s say that you need to left join DimAttribute2 to FactTable.  Simply follow these steps:

Step 1: Edit the Attribute

  1. In the attribute editor, go to Tools -> VLDB Properties.
  2. Change the property Joins -> Preserve all final pass result elements to the third option, Preserve all elements of final pass result table with respect to lookup table but not relationship table.
  3. Update Schema.

Step 2: Edit the Report

  1. In the report editor, go to Data -> VLDB Properties.
  2. Change the property Joins -> Preserve all final pass result elements to the fourth option, Do not listen to per report level setting, preserve elements of the final pass according to the setting at the attribute level.

With those two options combined, the resulting report now generates this SQL:

select a12.Attribute1  Attribute1, a13.Attribute2  Attribute2, sum(a11.Fact)  Metric

from FactTable a11 join DimAttribute1 a12

on (a11.Attribute1Key = a12.Attribute1Key) left outer join DimAttribute2 a13 

on (a11.Attribute2Key = a13.Attribute2Key)

group by a12.Attribute1, a13.Attribute2

Conclusion Note that since you need to turn on a report level setting, changing the attribute won’t modify your entire system.  This is nice because you can choose to let some reports to left join on that attribute while not others.  One side effect I have experienced is that this attribute is no longer eligible for Intelligent Cubes. If you can live with that, this becomes a pretty handy trick.

Bryan’s Blog Entry Link:  http://www.bryanbrandow.com/2011/03/left-joins-in-microstrategy.html

Commentary: Some Thoughts on my MicroStrategy v9.4.1 Upgrade Installation on my Laptop – PART 1

v9.4.1

Readers:

Last night, I installed MicroStrategy v9.4.1 on my laptop. I already have MicroStrategy v9.3.1 Hotfix 3 on it, but want to start experimenting with some of the new features.

I have a 10 seat license that any legitimate business can download and use for free. The link to apply and download the 10 seat version is here.

Before I talk about some of the interesting components of this install, I want to say that this was the easiest and smoothest install (actually, an upgrade) of any MicroStrategy product I have had. I installed the whole enchilada; Intelligence Server, Web Server, Mobile Server, etc.

I hope you find these notes helpful.

MichaelI have some other really interesting commentaries I am working on and hope to be able to share with you soon.

Best Regards,

Michael

Impact of the Upgrade

My scenario involved the following configuration:

MicroStrategy Software:

  • I already had MicroStrategy v9.3.1 Hotfix 3 installed on my laptop.

Laptop Configuration:

  • Windows 7 Professional with Service Pack 1
  • Intel Core i7 CPU @ 2.20 GHz
  • 64-Bit Operating System
  • 6.0 GB RAM
  • 600 GB Hard Disk

Here are a few name/product changes MicroStrategy Made:

  • MicroStrategy v9.4.1 is referred to now as MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise.
  • MicroStrategy Desktop is renamed to MicroStrategy Developer.
  • MicroStrategy Distribution Services replaces Narrowcast in v9.x.

Upgrading to MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise can have a significant impact on your system. The sections below cover some of the specific effects of upgrading.

Client/Server Interoperability

MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise clients and servers are interoperable with MicroStrategy clients and servers from version 9.0.2 and later. However, full feature support may not be available when the MicroStrategy client and server are on different versions. To ensure full feature support, upgrade all clients and servers to MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise.

MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise is not interoperable with pre-9.0.2 releases. That is, clients (such as MicroStrategy Web or Developer) from MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise cannot communicate with servers (such as Intelligence Server or MicroStrategy Web Server) from pre-9.0.2 releases, and clients from pre-9.0.2 releases cannot communicate with servers from MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise.

If your system is using a version of MicroStrategy prior to 9.0.2, all clients and servers must be upgraded to MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise at the same time.

All MicroStrategy products on an individual machine must use the same version of MicroStrategy. In my case, since my laptop is my only environment, I will be upgrading all components to v9.4.1. Do not install or upgrade only some MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise products on a machine containing older versions of other MicroStrategy products. For example, if you upgrade your Intelligence Server to MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise, and the Intelligence Server machine contains a copy of Developer, make sure you upgrade Developer on that machine to MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise as well.

In addition, if a MicroStrategy Web client from a version of MicroStrategy prior to 9.3.1 connects to an Intelligence Server from version 9.3.1 or later, a previous version of the MicroStrategy Web search page is shown. To correct this, either upgrade the MicroStrategy Web client to the latest version, or, in the MicroStrategy Web user preferences, change the default start page to any different page, save the user preferences, change it back to its previous value, and save the user preferences again.

MicroStrategy Mobile Client/Server Interoperability

MicroStrategy Mobile clients from MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise can communicate with Intelligence Server or MicroStrategy Mobile Server from pre-9.2.0 releases. However, full feature support may not be available when the MicroStrategy Mobile client and server are on different versions. To ensure full feature support, upgrade all clients and servers to MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise.

MicroStrategy Mobile Server Analytics Enterprise and later is not interoperable with pre-9.2.0 client releases. That is, MicroStrategy Mobile clients and apps from before version 9.2.0 cannot communicate with Intelligence Server Analytics Enterprise or MicroStrategy Mobile Server Analytics Enterprise.

New Features and Workflow Changes

This section describes some of the changes in MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise and earlier that may affect your users’ workflows.

For a complete list of new products, new features, and updates in MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise, see the MicroStrategy Tech Note “New Features in MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise.”

The default options for VLDB settings may change between releases. You can determine what VLDB default settings have changed by creating a VLDB settings report for your database type before the upgrade, and comparing it to a VLDB settings report created after the upgrade. For instructions on how to create a default VLDB settings report, see the section on Default VLDB settings for specific data sources in the Supplemental Reference for System Administration.

New features and workflow changes in MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise

Some of the new features of MicroStrategy Analytics Enterprise that may affect your users’ workflows include:

  • The name of MicroStrategy Desktop has been changed to MicroStrategy Developer.
  • The following predefined security roles have been renamed:
    • The Desktop Analyst security role has been changed to Analyst.
    • The Desktop Designer security role has been changed to Developer.
  • The following privilege groups have been renamed:
    • The Desktop Analyst privilege group has been changed to Analyst.
    • The Desktop Designer privilege group has been changed to Developer.

New features and workflow changes in MicroStrategy 9.4

Some of the new features of MicroStrategy 9.4 that may affect your users’ workflows include:

  • In a document, if you no longer display an attribute that is used to sort data, the data is no longer sorted by that attribute. You can still select that attribute to sort data.
  • When importing data from a file, the Select Linking Object panel is now the Select Attribute Form dialog box.
  • When creating a new Visual Insight dashboard, the Dataset Objects panel is now opened by default.
  • When creating a new Visual Insight dashboard, you are no longer immediately prompted to select a visualization type to add to the dashboard. Instead, a blank visualization is added to the dashboard and displayed.
  • The menu options for adding a new metric to a Visual Insight dashboard have been reorganized. For detailed steps to add new metrics to a Visual Insight dashboard, see the MicroStrategy Web Help.
  • When defining a threshold condition to display data in a visualization, to create a new metric value band, click the horizontal slider bar in the Thresholds Editor.
  • When enabling a visualization to update the data displayed in another visualization, the Enable Filtering on Selection option is selected by default.
  • The options to export a Visual Insight dashboard are now available in the Tools menu, under Export.
  • The Graph Matrix visualization has been combined with the Graph visualization.
    • The graph styles previously available for the Graph Matrix visualization (Bar, Area, Line, Scatter, Bubble, and Grid) are now available as styles for the Graph visualization.
    • In the Graph panel, the Rows and Y-axis areas have been combined into the Vertical Axis area.
    • In the Graph panel, the Columns and X-axis areas have been combined into the Horizontal Axis area.
  • In a Grid visualization, in the Properties panel, the Fit To option is now the Width option.
  • Integrity Manager now retrieves all rows of a report or document at once.
  • In MicroStrategy Office, many locales no longer require the Microsoft Office Multi-Lingual User Interface (MUI) to correctly display prompt values during internationalization.
  • In MicroStrategy Office, if you add multiple outline reports with dynamic grouping to a single Excel worksheet, all those outline reports retain their dynamic grouping. Previously, only the first outline report retained its dynamic grouping.

New features and workflow changes in MicroStrategy 9.3.1

Some of the new features of MicroStrategy 9.3.1 that may affect your users’ workflows include:

  • In Windows, the MicroStrategy folder in the Start menu has been replaced by two other folders. The MicroStrategy Products folder contains the following items:All other MicroStrategy applications can be found in the MicroStrategy Tools folder in the Start menu.
    • Command Manager
    • Developer
    • Integrity Manager
    • Object Manager
    • System Manager
    • MicroStrategy Web
  • In MicroStrategy Web, the look and feel of the interface has been updated. A new navigational icon bar has been added to the Web interface, with options to create quick dashboards, reports, documents, and more. For detailed instructions on using this new interface, see the MicroStrategy Web Help.
  • In MicroStrategy Web, on the toolbar, the floppy disk is now Save for reports and documents. Previously the floppy disk was Save As.
  • In MicroStrategy Web, to share a link to an object, in your personal folder, right-click the object and select Share, then click Email Link.
  • Visual Insight analyses are now referred to as quick dashboards.
  • In Distribution Services, the Use Send Now privilege is no longer required to send a preview of a subscription. The new privilege Use Send A Preview Now is now required to send a preview of a subscription.
  • The MicroStrategy SDK is no longer available to be installed with the MicroStrategy release. The most recent version of the MicroStrategy SDK is available as a free download from the MicroStrategy support site https://resource.microstrategy.com/msdz/default.asp.
  • Update packages can now be hosted on remote servers. Prior to MicroStrategy 9.3.1, update packages were required to be hosted on the Intelligence Server machine. For information about importing update packages, see the Managing Your Projects chapter of the MicroStrategy System Administration Guide.
  • If you are upgrading from MicroStrategy 9.2.1m or earlier, some widgets that were previously created to display on Android tablets may display as grids or graphs on the mobile device. To display these widgets correctly on Android tablets, see Updating Android widgets from MicroStrategy 9.2.1m.

Next: Upgrade Best Practices

Tips & Tricks #1: How to filter more than one substring in the Find search box when selecting a long list of elements from a dynamic prompt list

There are cases in which a dynamic prompt is used to qualify attributes selected to be part of a report, but the attribute list is very long.

Attributes like ‘Street Address’ may contain keywords like ‘St’, ‘Ave’, ‘Dr’ that can be used to reduce the list of selected elements.

It is possible to filter the list using the find box and to include one or more substrings that can be logically ‘ORed’ (Will be included if any of the substrings is found) or logically ‘ANDed’ (Will be included if all substrings).

Pattern delimiters are ‘ ‘ (space), ‘%’ and ‘_ ‘

Space or blank  = will be used for logical ‘OR’

‘%’  =  Will be used for logical ‘AND’  usually in pairs (begin-end of string)

‘_’   =  Will be used as wildcard in lieu of space (blank)

 CASE 1: Filter all attributes that contains ‘z’ or ‘x’ strings:

Case1

In this example, all listed addresses contains string ‘z’ OR string ‘x’ in any position of the description.

CASE 2: Filter all attributes that contains first the string ‘Old’ AND then ‘Hwy’:

Case2

Observe that substring ‘Old’ and ‘Hwy’ can be part of other string and can start in any position.  However, using %Hwy%%Old% will produce a different result.

In this example, this filter will produce an empty list as there is no address that have substring ‘Hwy’ before ‘Old’.

CASE 3: Filter all attributes that contains the substring ‘Old Hwy’:

Case3

Special character  ‘_’ should be used to represent a single space. Cannot be duplicated for representing multiple space.

In this example, if the filter were ‘_Old_Hwy’, the last two elements will not be shown as they do not begin with spaces.

NOTE: Examples shown in MicroStrategy Desktop, but it apply also to the Web interface when using the find box in dynamic prompts.