We have two different types of projects -- the basic information is the same but the set of sheets/reports/dashboards are different between the two. I'd like to set up two separate blueprints but use the same intake and summary sheet for both.
Is there a problem with doing this type of architecture?
Our team is currently using this where they have one part intake sheet (metadata) to take in the same information, sort of like a master copy. And then we have this individual sheets referring to separate blueprints.
Hi@KryFthe example only shows a single blueprint. So, not quite a match. I'm going to go ahead and run a test on my end. Just to be clear, the only thing that is shared are the red bits -- the intake and the summary sheet.
Hey@Mary_Adid you get an answer or test this yourself? I am trying to maximize my rollups for better analysis. My setup would be a shared intake sheet using "different" blueprints (actually the blueprints will be identical), so that i can use 1 common/shared summary sheet for basic metrics, as well as more specific summary sheets for more granular "per category" metrics. This way i can fit more projects within a summary sheet before hitting max 100K inbound cell limit.
不ver got a reply. However, I did set it up and test it myself. Doesn't appear to cause any issues. We don't have a lot of the type B projects say less than 2%of the Project A. Don't know if you'd see issues with more.
I'm trying to do the same thing. One question-- did your blueprints use any dynamic reports? If so, were there any issues having multiple blueprints going to the same dynamic reports?
@Brian555In our case, one blueprint used dynamic reports, and the other did not. The sharing intake and summary didn't seem to impact the one that used it.
Blueprint A, had a A1 sheet against which a dynamic report was run.
Blueprint B, did not have sheet A1 and no dynamic reports.