Choosing sub-totals in pivot table wizard
The pivot table wizard where users can choose between dimensions/alternative dimensions or measure is a great feature.
However, we have users who would like to have the totals or not at the level they want. Today we have no choice than displaying the totals for every levels.
(44.1 KB)
Hi Vincent,
Thanks for sharing your feedback with us - if we added a checkbox for "show subtotals", is this the sort of feature that would satisfy your use case?
This is a first step but ideally having the ability to choose for each dimensions in the pivot table would be even better.
For example, we can have a table with delivery volumes, each row is a delivery date, each column is a product. Each product has it own unit of measure. We want to have a total at the end of each column, but we don't want a total for each rows.
So, in this case, we will check the show subtotal on the dimension product and not on month (or if we respect the weird way to do it in Qlik product, we show the subtotal for month and not for product).
Not sure that this is clear, I can try to create a sample image if needed.
I'll +1 this for the wizard and especially for the Alternatives dialog. Being able to modify the subtotals in a simple, intuitive way would be quite helpful to people who are playing around with the different dimensions.
I've adapted the Table wizard display with how I could see this working. As ever, not sure if it's feasible, but:
1) A checkbox for whether or not subtotals should be displayed - disabling this will revert to the existing pivot table wizard display (default should be disable, since that's the current view)
2) If the checkbox is enabled, each dimension field will get a Subtotal / No Subtotal option, similar to the existing Measure/Dimension box in the Table Wizard. This should of course be correctly populated for existing fields based on whether or not they are marked as subtotal enabled.
+1 this as well! Was just about to request this feature!
+1. Would be very useful
+1
is this point a future requirement?
+1. Would be very useful