How to Filter Multiple Tables Using Parameters in Quick Sight?

Q&A
,
1

Hi everyone,

I have a question regarding filtering multiple tables in Amazon Quick Sight using parameters. I have three tables that I’ve uploaded separately into a Quick Sight analysis: deposits, portfolio, and rules. The relationship between these tables is illustrated in the diagram below:

image
image561×174 26.3 KB

I would like to achieve the following:

  1. Click on a customer_id in the deposits table.
  2. This should filter the portfolio table based on the selected customer_id.
  3. Extract all contract_ids that remains and match from the filtered portfolio table.
  4. Use these contract_ids to filter the rules table.

Could someone guide me on how to set this up using parameters in Quick Sight?

Thank you!

2

Hello Nadia,

First of all Welcome to the Quick Sight community.

I think you should refer to the below blog and focus on use case 2 -

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
Deep

3

Hi Deep, thank you for your response. Unfortunately, that’s not quite the use case I’m looking for. I need a solution where selecting one field, which acts as a parameter, dynamically sets another parameter with values from another field, that corresponds to a different dataset.

4

Hi @nadia,

It’s been awhile since last communication took place on this thread; are you still encountering the same issues or were you able to implement a work around?
When utilizing the ‘show relevant values’ option to filter down your control’s values, the parameters need to be setup on the same dataset to link them.
The work around option I would suggest in this case would be to try linking both your parameters to the ‘portfolio’ dataset. You should be able to still filter visuals built with ‘deposits’ using the customer_id parameter, and you should be able to still filter visuals in the ‘rules’ dataset with the contract_id parameter.
Filtering down visuals built on different datasets can be tricky in Quick Sight though and may not always work based on various factors.

Let me know if this could work for your case or if you have any additional questions. If we do not hear back within the next 3 business days, I’ll close out this topic.

Thank you

5

No, we are still searching for a good solution…

6

Hi @nadia,

Did you test out the work around I suggested? If so and it did not work as expected; your only other work around option would be to join your tables so that the parameter fields are in one dataset and can be handled together.

7

Hi @nadia,

Following up here as it’s been awhile since last communication took place on this thread; were you able to review my last response and if so, do you have any questions regarding it?

If we do not hear back within the next 3 business days, I’ll close out this topic.

Thank you

8

Hi @nadia,

Since we have not heard back further, I’ll go ahead and close out this topic. However, if you have any additional questions, feel free to create a new post in the community and link this discussion for relevant information if needed.

Thank you