dhis2-devs team mailing list archive

[Lars Helge Øverland <larshelge@xxxxxxxxx>]

> OK, but then I would think that zeros should also be written to the
> aggregatedatavalue table as well ?
>
> If the aggregated numerator shows up as the numerator in the
> aggregatedindicatorvalue table as zero (but not blank) but does not
> show up at all in the aggregateddatavalue table at all (neither as
> blank or zero) it does not seem consistent to me.
>
> Shouldn't  the result of an aggregation operation of all blanks
> results in a zero, which would be the same as an aggregation operation
> of a set of all zeros or a mixture of both blanks and zeros?
>
>  It would seem to be the case with the aggregatedindicatorvalue table,
> but not the aggregateddatavalue table?
>
>
Yes there is a slight inconsistency here. Still, I think this is as good as
we get it. Remember that we (in most cases, except for "average"
dataelements) don't store 0s in the raw datavalue table. This means that the
0s you would get in the agg.datavalue table would represent blanks anyway.

This is also a pragmatic issue. When saving 0s in the datavalue table and
exporting 0s to the agg.datavalue table we experienced for a typical case
that the tables would contain 70-80 % of 0s, which slowed down queries a
lot.