Unanswered questions

Hello All,I need your help on Ataccama One DQ issue.I created an accuracy rule for Zipcode using lkp table.In the lkp table, Zipcode is stored as an integer, but in the Catalog,src attribute as nvarchar(20).When building the rule, Ataccama forces me to choose integer as the data type because the lkp table uses integers.But since the Catalog attribute is nvarchar, the rule is not working. and tried with lkp as string and i/p attribute in lkp also as string which thrown an error while evaluation.I also cannot change the src attribute datatype from nvarchar(20) to integer because:If I convert it to integer using cast, NULL values will move to completeness checks,And I will not get the incorrect rows under accuracy.So I need a solution that allows the accuracy rule to work even though the lookup table uses an integer Zipcode and the Catalog column uses nvarchar.Thanks in advance.Deepali 

Hello Ataccama Community,I’ve been exploring the Data Slicing feature in Ataccama 16.2 and it looks like a great tool for profiling large datasets. However, I noticed that Hive and Sybase are not listed as supported databases for slicing.Since we rely on Hive Data Lakes and Sybase in our environment, I wanted to ask if there are any plans to support these databases in future releases, or if anyone has found effective workarounds for slicing data from these sources before profiling.Looking forward to your insights! Create a Data Slice :: Ataccama ONE

This is my result in REST API call.I need to consume my entire REST API using the next record URL until done is set as true.How do I achieve this in Ataccama.

Hi,We have implemented Pushdown in our application and have noticed that when we have a few DQ Rules that are not supported by Pushdown, are forced to run the whole Monitoring project in regular (non-Pushdown) mode. Even when the catalog items running pushdown un-supported rules are excluded from pushdown processing using Advanced settings on Monitoring project, still leads to those DQ Rules failing.Is there a hybrid approach to run Monitoring projects implementing a mixture of pushdown supported and unsupported DQ Rules ? Atacama should have the ability to selectively run pushdown supported DQ rules in Pushdown and non-supported in regular mode without forcing users to choose one. This should be done automatically. Please let us know if there are any suggestions.

How do I build a report to show data stewards the completeness of their respective business terms? For example, 57% of terms in the Customer domain have a Domain Owner assigned.

Hello,I need to make an API POST call where the endpoint expects multipart/form-data. The API accepts normal JSON fields as part of the multipart request, and it also requires a .csv file upload as a mandatory input.Right now, I am using a JSON call step, but that only lets me send application/json. Since the API requires multipart with both JSON and file, I’m not sure how to proceed.My Questions:1. How do I send JSON + a CSV file in a single multipart request?2. Do I need to switch from the JSON call step to a multipart/form-data step?3. If using Ataccama, which step/component should be used to construct multipart requests?

I have to write DQ rules on a table that should execute through monitoring projects.Only data with max date should be evaluated or evaluation should happen for date that use adds dynamically. How to achieve this?

I have a requirement to develop a rule that checks value of an attribute should be from a given list of values. The attribute should have at least one record of each of the list item. It should fail if any of the values don’t appear in the attribute. I cannot consider lookup as lookup will perform OR operation on the given list, instead I would like to have AND operation. e.g., list of values List1 = {1,2,3,4,’pqr’, ‘abc’}, column name = Col1Test case - Col1 should have at least one entry of each item from List1. It should fail if any of the 6 values from List1 fail to appear in Col1 values Thanks for the help in advance! 

Hi All,When we insert relations via Collibra writer  we have defined source/target fields in the writer step. There is only one way to send relations to Collibra. We got into a case where if 1 source can have many targets eg( 1 schema with 1000 tables) and you give schema in source and table in target and you define the Import File Size as 100, the writer does not breaks the calls in 100 records instead it will send 1 call with all 1000 records since 1 schema has 1000 tables. This makes sense as sending at once makes sure that all the tables get associated to 1 schema. If it will break it into 100 then only the last call with 100 records will get related to that schema. Now to solve this problem we can send the relations to Collibra in reverse direction as well (1 table has only 1 schema). In this case the writer will correctly batch the records in 100. But inorder to do that the collibra writer should be updating the json call it sends internally. Which will be a product enhancement.

 HelloI am trying to use monitoring project results to create a dashboard. OOTB functionality looks limited and allows me to create few visuals only like quality over time and failed records. But I can’t access the attributes created in report section of monitoring project: For Ex:    I am looking at creating something like:  

We would like to calculate weekly count of Id should not be more than +-2 standard deviation of the 6-week rolling average over week id.table attribute: week_id, id Is there any way to calculate this in ataccama One using advance expression?

!--startfragment>Hi everyone,I'm working on a plan in Ataccama Desktop where I want to automatically assign Data Quality (DQ) rules to attributes based on their associated tags (terms). My goal is to streamline DQ evaluation by leveraging the Business Glossary and ONE Metadata Writer.Here’s what I’m trying to achieve:Build a plan in Ataccama Desktop that:Reads metadata from ONE Applies DQ rules based on tags Writes back the results using the ONE Metadata WriterHas anyone implemented a similar setup?I’d love to hear best practices, tips on configuring the Metadata Writer, or examples of how you’ve mapped terms to rules effectively. Thanks in advance!Philipp !--endfragment>

Hello all,I am running into an issue when trying to grab terms from attribute items. My current use case is as follows. I have a list of catalog item that are tagged with a term (that we refer to as a jurisdiction) and I am attempting to first find all attributes associated with these catalog items and then find all terms that are tagged to these attributes. The order is as follows:Find all catalog items with term → get all attributes associated with catalog items → extract all terms on attributesMy plan looks like this: The issue that I am running into is that these plans take a very long time to run sometimes upwards of 30min to an hour depending on the term. I would like to know if there is a more efficient way to do this (either through graphql or some other components etc) or if I am simply stuck waiting with the current speed of the plan. Best Regards,Andrew

Hi,Previously we added Data Quality rules on Attribute Terms via Settings. The outcomes was not something we expected as customers could see the organisational Data Quality score. Where we expected they could see the DQ score on Attribute terms which were only available to them. Hence we removed the DQ rules on Attribute Terms, but the DQ score is still visible in certain Catalog Items. My question: how to get rid of this?  

Hi,I added a DQ Rule on a boolean data type attribute inside a Monitoring Project (MP). After the attribute changed datatype I had to add a new DQ rule with string attribute, but the old DQ rule vanished. How do I get rid of the error?