Hi ​@Lazov,

“Now I want to use the result of the Matching Rule further in the next steps as value.”

Could you please clarify how you want to use the result?

Hi ​@AKislyakov ,

thank you for your reply.

I simply want to take the value in a field - somehow having a field, let’s call it LEVENSHTEIN_DIST_VAL and store the result therein.

Honestly, the original case is much more complex - the calculation result contains the x and y values and many other details, so if I take the result field as the sole field of the whole Matching step, I can split it properly to further fields that contain all the details I need.

This is why I need the result only, nothing else.

​@AKislyakov just for the completeness’ sake, here it is an example of the real result I want to take as value:

100;176;<14/1011657/W_CUA1#<GB_263_CALDICOT_MAGOR TRUNKING STATION>;<14/1013791/W_CUA1#<GB_263_CALDICOT_MAGOR TRUNKING STATION>

As you see it is the result of a complex data matching function and this string perfectly covers all data I need to use further in the workflow.It’s pointless to explain the structure, the point is that I need this string to be carried on with.

If you need to use result elsewhere inside matching step, then you can setup a matching measure instead, and access its result via measures.measure_name

Thank you. The point is to take the result further to next step in the workflow. Is it possible with the suggestion above? I tried to use the matching measure but failed - what should I add there as expression? It did not accept the matcing function or any field name either.

The point is to take the result further to next step in the workflow

That’s not possible. Matching step has a fixed set of output columns, which couldn’t be extended.
If you need to calculate something between instance rows, you can check Aggregation layer it allows you to bring all relevant instance records at once and assign results back to them.

what should I add there as expression? 

In measures inputs are called pivot and candidate. Here is an example from CDI Example Project

Another point is that Matching Measures is not capable of the same ‘x to y’ comparison by default that Match Functions can do. I don’t know what other way I can match the records grouped by a certain value.

Learning the options I have I got to the conclusion that I have no clue why my company invested a copper in Ataccama - this tool is unable to deliver a standard duplication check that we could build in even a usual DWH environment.

​@AKislyakov though, I say thank you for your effort on bringing light to this, and for your certain attempt to help me out with solutions that might work. Eventually I will give the Aggregation a chance to see what it is capable of.