Table/matrix visual not filtering on column associated with CALCULATE measure

[NC]

It seems that neither the table nor the matrix visual will apply a filter on a column that is used in a filter clause of a CALCULATE measure unless an identifying column from the target data table is also included. A sample report that demonstrates this behaviour is available at here. As a bit of explanation:

1. The model contains two tables, Things and ThingTypes, in a 1-to-many relationship. (i.e.: Each Thing can have several types.)
2. A Types measure exists to provide a concatenated list of types for each Thing. This measure uses the CALCULATE function to prevent the concatenated list from being affected by any filters on the ThingTypes.Type column:
   

   Types = CALCULATE(
       CONCATENATEX(ThingTypes, ThingTypes[Type], ", "), 
       ALL(ThingTypes[Type]))

3. A report page contains a slicer for ThingTypes.Type and a table visual showing a list of Things, including the Types measure described in #2.
4. When selecting a particular Type in the slicer, one would expect to see the table visual filtered to only display Things with that particular Type, exactly as it would if the measure were not present in the visual. However, this filtering does not occur unless the ThingTypes.ID columns that is used in the relationship is also included in the visual. (Inclusion of other columns from the ThingTypes table do not seem relevant in the various tests I've attempted.)

[v-jiascu-msft]

Hi @NC,

I have consulted the Product Team. I will update here later.

Best Regards,

Dale

[NC]

Thank you!

[v-jiascu-msft]

Hi @NC,

I have reported this issue to the Product Team: CRI 55091116.

Best Regards,

Dale

[v-jiascu-msft]

Hi @NC,

I have gotten the responses from the Product Team:

The product behavior is by design. A slicer only affects the calculation of measures in a table visual and columns from the same table. A slicer does NOT affect columns from other tables whether or not the relationship is bi-directional. In this incident, the measure is not affected by the slicer due to the ALL clause and the column Table1[ID] is not from the same table as slicer column Table2[Type]. As a result, the slicer has no effect on the table visual.

Best Regards,

Dale

[NC]

Dale,

I suspect that I haven't explained the issue very well since the presence of the measure is definitely having an unexpected impact on slicing. I've updated the sample to include a copy of the table visual that does not include the measure. Use of the slicer has the expected effect of filtering the new table visual on the selected Type(s). My expectation would be that addition of a measure to a table visual would have no effect on filtering of the visual (as you stated in your previous message), with the measure simply being evaluated in the context of the rows that are visible in the table. However, this is not what happens. Instead, addition of the measure seems to prevent the Type slicer from having its expected effect. Does that make a bit more sense?

Thanks,
Nicole