RunningValue In Matrix

Hello, I was wonder if it is possible to have a RunningValue per row on a
matrix? I want to Sum a number onto itself and show in each columnfor the
first row and reset for the second row and start all over again. I am going
to use conditional statements to control what value is being summed based on
the rowgroup I am at, but that number will have to sum onto itself for every
column in each row.
Ie. 38, 76, 114, 152, 190 in first row
second row: 38, 76, 114, 152, 190
These are based on the variable Fields!WC_TOTALS_DIVIDEND_ROUNDED.Value
Thanks,
BJYes reporting services literally provides a runningvalue function
called runningvalue. In your case runningvalue(Sum(Fields!
Wc_TOTALS_DIVIDEND_ROUNDED)). Put it in the data field of the matrix.
Make sure to use the appropriate column group.

Running totals in matrix?

Is it possible to create a row in a matrix that represents the running total
over time? Can I do this in the matrix itself or does this need to be
calculated in the dataset? If it's the latter, any ideas for how to do this
simply?
Example:
Jan Feb Mar
Monthly Sales 150 59 124
Cumulative Sales 150 209 333
Thanks!there is a running value in the aggregation expression...
On Jan 5, 1:36=A0am, jmann <jm...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Is it possible to create a row in a matrix that represents the running tot=al
> over time? =A0Can I do this in the matrix itself or does this need to be
> calculated in the dataset? =A0If it's the latter, any ideas for how to do =this
> simply?
> Example:
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Jan =A0= =A0 =A0 Feb =A0 =A0 =A0 Mar
> Monthly Sales =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 150 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A059 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ==A0124
> Cumulative Sales =A0 =A0 =A0150 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0209 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0333
> Thanks!|||On Jan 5, 4:53 am, Sridar K <srid...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> there is a running value in the aggregation expression...
> On Jan 5, 1:36 am, jmann <jm...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> > Is it possible to create a row in a matrix that represents the running total
> > over time? Can I do this in the matrix itself or does this need to be
> > calculated in the dataset? If it's the latter, any ideas for how to do this
> > simply?
> > Example:
> > Jan Feb Mar
> > Monthly Sales 150 59 124
> > Cumulative Sales 150 209 333
> > Thanks!
The Running Total/Value expression is explained here:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa255824.aspx
Just as an FYI, you would normally use a cursor or while loop to
provide this type of functionality in the stored procedure/query that
is sourcing the report. Of course, this option adds complexity and
poor performance, so I would suggest using the Running Value
expression. Hope this helps.
Regards,
Enrique Martinez
Sr. Software Consultant|||I'm trying the RunningTotal expression (Fields!Sales.Value, Sum, Nothing) and
getting the following error:
"The value expression for the textbox â'textbox6â' has a scope parameter that
is not valid for RunningValue, RowNumber or Previous. The scope parameter
must be set to a string constant that is equal to the name of a containing
group within the matrix â'matrix1â'." Not sure what this means. Any ideas?
Thanks!
"EMartinez" wrote:
> On Jan 5, 4:53 am, Sridar K <srid...@.gmail.com> wrote:
> > there is a running value in the aggregation expression...
> >
> > On Jan 5, 1:36 am, jmann <jm...@.discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Is it possible to create a row in a matrix that represents the running total
> > > over time? Can I do this in the matrix itself or does this need to be
> > > calculated in the dataset? If it's the latter, any ideas for how to do this
> > > simply?
> >
> > > Example:
> >
> > > Jan Feb Mar
> > > Monthly Sales 150 59 124
> > > Cumulative Sales 150 209 333
> >
> > > Thanks!
>
> The Running Total/Value expression is explained here:
> http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa255824.aspx
> Just as an FYI, you would normally use a cursor or while loop to
> provide this type of functionality in the stored procedure/query that
> is sourcing the report. Of course, this option adds complexity and
> poor performance, so I would suggest using the Running Value
> expression. Hope this helps.
> Regards,
> Enrique Martinez
> Sr. Software Consultant
>