none
I am in BIG TROUBLE... Please help! Task Usage / Resource Usage / GANTT / Assignment Usage OLAP Cube all have different Baseline Work Numbers RRS feed

  • Question

  • How can this be?  I have never seen this before, but in our 2010 Project Server Environment it is presenting different numbers in each view, and none of them align.

    The Assignement Usage numbers, they do align when reviewing resource baseline work vs. tasks baseline work.  However, the baseline work does not match up against any view I pull up in MS Project Professional.

    Versions: 

    Project Prof:  14.0.6112.5000

    Project Server:  unknown (supported by a 3rd party and I am attempting to gain that info)

    Was there a CU that I missed that would resolve this problem, or is there a CU for the Server?

    Thanks,

    T



    • Edited by trpy2k Friday, September 28, 2012 6:07 PM
    Friday, September 28, 2012 4:58 PM

Answers

  • Here is where I stand now:

    Task Usage:  Have been able to get the Visual Reports corrected.  It turns out that someone has placed hours against an OBE task, but never put them in the TimePhased View.  This probably occurred since no resource was assigned against the task that I can see...   One Problem:  I can not seem to get visual reports to turn out the "Baseline Work" data, even saving the cube locally and verifying that field is included still does not turn those out to the report. :( *Still a Problem of another sort*

    Assignment Usage:  Still having massive problems here.  I pulled the Visual Report (Baseline Work Report) which uses the Assignment Usage Cube, at the Month level.  Then I worked that against the Task Usage TimePhased Numbers.  There is a 4,000 hour variance between the two sets of numbers.  So I looked to the Baseline Saved date...  Now, the baseline was originally done in the Month of March (project started in Nov preceeding but didn't get baselined until it was well underway).  Guess which month the data starts to diverge...  Yep, March.  So, is there a reason why the numbers would be so far off in the Assignment Usage?  Is a baseline field being used that I can not view.  I guess the question comes down "Which fields are in the SQL call for Assignment Usage"?  Baseline Work occurs in multiple tables, so if we know which table is wrong, this could help. *see below for the answer*

    *edit* 

    Well, additional sluething has brought me some additional information and most of the solution... 

    It turns out that while I had instituted a strict "DO NOT DELETE RESOURCES OR TASKS FROM A BASELINED SCHEDULE", the scheduler did not follow that to the letter.  After reviewing the baseline work against timephased Resource Usage & Task Usage views, there was missing data in a number of timephased fields. 

    The evidence showed that there was a total number of baseline work hours higher than the summation of all Resources Baseline Work.  This demonstrates that a resource (or multiple resources) were deleted from the task post baseline.  Additional research showed that additional efforts were added as an "Actual Work" number and not input into the timephased views.

    I am still looking into the variance between Project Server Cube and Project Data, but I am feeling pretty confident that the same issue will become evident with further review.

    To fix this issue, I am going to need to input those "Missing" baseline hours by hand into each task's timephased view with a generic enterprise resource in order to have the correct Initial Baseline Data show up in reporting.  AKA - a whole lot of work!

    • Edited by trpy2k Tuesday, October 2, 2012 9:31 PM Discovered most of the issue
    • Marked as answer by trpy2k Tuesday, October 2, 2012 9:31 PM
    Tuesday, October 2, 2012 8:14 PM

All replies

  • Hi, T, No answers, I'm afraid but a couple of suggestions to help narrow the problem down.

    Can you compare the data and times when the different data versions were created? When was the Project data last changed in Project Professional? When was the project last baselined? When was the project last published? When was the OLAP cube generated?

    Graham

    Sunday, September 30, 2012 8:46 PM
  • Others have found this to be true in the 2010 product and I have found the same thing in the MSP2007 product with various cumulative updates. I have tested this extensively in the past 4 days. I have tested with SP3 with Dec 2011 CU, and SP3 with Aug 2012 CU. I got the identical results each time.

    Please take a look at these posts. They illustrate the issue is not just yours alone. MS needs (IMHO) to get this fixed because for government customers, this is unacceptable.

    One of these posts has some code that might work for you. I have not yet tried it.

    http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/projectprofessional2010general/thread/63293cb4-9eea-4c5a-bc31-01cab2b1b583

    http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/projectprofessional2010general/thread/f6edef79-adb1-49ab-8613-4501ee115a19


    • Edited by Quized again Tuesday, October 2, 2012 5:06 PM data added
    Tuesday, October 2, 2012 3:54 PM
  • Graham,

    Thanks for the reply.  I am the administrator for the system, and therefore I do not monitor the day to day changes to the project schedules, but on a month to month, I do review the metrics.

    That said, I can review when the baselines were saved (well in the past), and publishing occurs weekly with updated information.  One OLAP cube is generated the day after publishing, and another generated daily.  This allows for me to verify that the cubes are not acting as they should.  I then reviewed the Baseline work numbers from the Gantt chart.  By sum totalling (in MS Excel), I have noticed that there has been no removal of hours.  I then verified the same from the Resource Sheet, and those sum total to the same number found in the Gantt Chart.  I have not yet sum totaled the Resource Usage or Task Usage views, but I suspect I will not have any variance from those either.

    This brings me to the final verfication, that of the TimePhased Data.  I will have to see if those numbers sum total the same as well.

    I will respond back with those verifications as they come available, however, the numbers are so far divergent (thousands of hours) that I feel there may be a problem that is not within my ability to review.

    Tuesday, October 2, 2012 6:11 PM
  • Quized again,

    Thank you for the response.  I thought I was losing my mind for a bit, as did some of the users in your other posts.  I will look into that Macro for some longer term work arounds, and hope that they solve the problem.

    You are correct about some clients needing this data to be accurate, because "If it isn't right, it is wrong".  If I can't get these number to show accurately, I will have to find a wholly other solution outside of MS Project.

    I know that the VB has changed from '07 to '10, so that macro may need additional work, and since I have only dabled in VB for '07, I may be at a loss.  That said, I have asked the System Integrator to test and deploy the August CU for Project Server, and I am going to run a test with the Project Professional June-August CU's.  I hope that they help.

    I will try to post back if those work.

    Thanks,

    T

    Tuesday, October 2, 2012 6:19 PM
  • Here is where I stand now:

    Task Usage:  Have been able to get the Visual Reports corrected.  It turns out that someone has placed hours against an OBE task, but never put them in the TimePhased View.  This probably occurred since no resource was assigned against the task that I can see...   One Problem:  I can not seem to get visual reports to turn out the "Baseline Work" data, even saving the cube locally and verifying that field is included still does not turn those out to the report. :( *Still a Problem of another sort*

    Assignment Usage:  Still having massive problems here.  I pulled the Visual Report (Baseline Work Report) which uses the Assignment Usage Cube, at the Month level.  Then I worked that against the Task Usage TimePhased Numbers.  There is a 4,000 hour variance between the two sets of numbers.  So I looked to the Baseline Saved date...  Now, the baseline was originally done in the Month of March (project started in Nov preceeding but didn't get baselined until it was well underway).  Guess which month the data starts to diverge...  Yep, March.  So, is there a reason why the numbers would be so far off in the Assignment Usage?  Is a baseline field being used that I can not view.  I guess the question comes down "Which fields are in the SQL call for Assignment Usage"?  Baseline Work occurs in multiple tables, so if we know which table is wrong, this could help. *see below for the answer*

    *edit* 

    Well, additional sluething has brought me some additional information and most of the solution... 

    It turns out that while I had instituted a strict "DO NOT DELETE RESOURCES OR TASKS FROM A BASELINED SCHEDULE", the scheduler did not follow that to the letter.  After reviewing the baseline work against timephased Resource Usage & Task Usage views, there was missing data in a number of timephased fields. 

    The evidence showed that there was a total number of baseline work hours higher than the summation of all Resources Baseline Work.  This demonstrates that a resource (or multiple resources) were deleted from the task post baseline.  Additional research showed that additional efforts were added as an "Actual Work" number and not input into the timephased views.

    I am still looking into the variance between Project Server Cube and Project Data, but I am feeling pretty confident that the same issue will become evident with further review.

    To fix this issue, I am going to need to input those "Missing" baseline hours by hand into each task's timephased view with a generic enterprise resource in order to have the correct Initial Baseline Data show up in reporting.  AKA - a whole lot of work!

    • Edited by trpy2k Tuesday, October 2, 2012 9:31 PM Discovered most of the issue
    • Marked as answer by trpy2k Tuesday, October 2, 2012 9:31 PM
    Tuesday, October 2, 2012 8:14 PM