on
RE:
We found a workaround, which is horrible. Incidentally, the suggestion value would read better as "is in the current or previous' [3] [Years].From the DateValue filter, select Date Filters::Between Click (Advanced) Click [Add Clause] Click back to (Basic) Select [is in the previous] [2] [Years] (or) [is in year] [This Year] (or) [is in the next] [1] [Years] Read the conditions to make sure the logic is what you want Click [OK] and “Close & Apply” on the top left of the toolbar
RE:
PowerBI currently times out connections in less than 15seconds. Please increase this timeout to 30 seconds, or use the property provided in the ODBC connection string!
RE:
In addition to cancelling if it doesn't receive the data in the desired time limit, the refresh fails if the datasource doesn't connect in less than 15 seconds. I believe the default for ODBC is 30 seconds, and they even have retry capabilities built into the ODBC driver. Don't bother trying to use them, PowerBI Ignores those properties. :(
RE:
Yes! My ODBC datasource takes more than 15sec to connect sometimes and PowerBI gives up on the connection way too soon. I am using the PowerBI Gateway and tried to adjust the timeout in the connection string, but PowerBI appears to ignore the connection timeout and doesn't even wait the default 30 seconds. Talking to powerBI support their solution was, make your datasource connect faster.My ask is that PowerBI follow industry standards and let us set the connection timeout or at least wait 30 seconds.
RE:
@Administrator: Great to see this on Road map, but can it be backed with an ETA ?If response time from suggestion to getting on the roadmap, I can fear that time to delivery will the same or even worse. Any consideration to create option to create connection a 3rd party DAM system ?
RE:
@Donald Parish I understand your point, but I respectfully disagree. When you have multiple tables related to client or product information that cannot be merged into a single table, it can indeed be confusing for the end user to find the information they need. To address this, I added prefixes like 'Client / ...' and 'Product / ...' to each table name. This helps in organizing the tables better, but unfortunately, it's still confusing. Ideally, adding a new folder just for display purposes, which doesn't impact the underlying data model, would be the best solution.
RE:
I wanted to note that this is occurring on the Timeline "highlights", whereas Case Summary will work fine.The images that it is complaining about have no offensive or harmful content.
RE:
I would actually suggest to add a parameter on Callcenter itself. We have scenarios, where we want to use credit management check only for some of the call centers.
RE:
This is definitely a "MUST HAVE" feature. Especially for the reports that the data is dynamically changing, people want to get exports or even printed versions of the report. It doesn't make a lot of sense to create "Paginated Report" for all of those objects.At least, it can be simply controlled via a "Printed View" property, which would be "Enabled" by default for all objects, and we can turn it off for the unnecessary ones!
RE:
Third project in a row that needs this process to work in WMS. Escpecially when they need an outbound shipment to be included in a load.