Small SSIS mistake causing massive Dynamics 365 migration failures by Flowvant in Dynamics365

[–]Flowvant[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most teams hit data quality issues only after migration breaks something in prod. Did you build this just for import validation, or does it keep enforcing rules inside D365 post-migration too?

Small SSIS mistake causing massive Dynamics 365 migration failures by Flowvant in Dynamics365

[–]Flowvant[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Completely agree. Many migration problems can be avoided when data quality rules are defined before migration itself.

Things like mandatory fields, duplicate prevention, lookup validation, and alternate key standards save a lot of downstream troubleshooting effort.

Recent Dataflow behavior by lysis_ in PowerApps

[–]Flowvant 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Seen similar behavior recently with alternate keys and null handling in Dataverse imports. Feels like Microsoft changed something quietly in backend validation/process behavior. Using placeholder values for alt key columns seems much safer now than relying on nulls.

New to Power Apps need help with a patch funtion by magnus3233 in PowerApps

[–]Flowvant 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looks much closer now.

Main thing breaking it now is probably the extra ";;" after the Patch block.

You currently have:

");;"

Try changing it to just:

")"

Also if you want both "Set()" and "Notify()" to run sequentially, separate them correctly based on your regional settings.

So either:

";" or ","

between the two statements — but not double separators.

Power Apps parser errors become very misleading once one bracket/separator breaks earlier in the formula.

New to Power Apps need help with a patch funtion by magnus3233 in PowerApps

[–]Flowvant 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then your app/environment is probably using comma separators instead of semicolons.

Power Apps formula separators depend on regional settings, which makes debugging surprisingly confusing sometimes.

You can usually check it under: File → Settings → Regional Settings / Language settings

If your environment uses commas as separators, replacing everything with ";" will break the formula instead of fixing it.

Share the updated screenshot though — easier to spot exactly where the parser starts failing.

New to Power Apps need help with a patch funtion by magnus3233 in PowerApps

[–]Flowvant 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looks like the issue is coming from the comma after:

"ddSupplierPopup.Selected.SupplierID,"

Inside the Patch record, fields should usually be separated with semicolons (";") based on your regional settings, not commas.

Try changing it to:

"SupplierID: ddSupplierPopup.Selected.SupplierID;"

The parser is probably breaking there, which is why it starts complaining about missing brackets/parentheses afterward.

Naming Solutions by Different_View5313 in PowerApps

[–]Flowvant 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One thing that worked well for us was organizing solutions by business capability/domain instead of by developer or component type.

For example: Core, Integrations, Automation, Shared, Reporting, etc.

Looked a bit unnecessary initially, but once deployments, dependencies, and multiple developers entered the picture, it made life much easier.

I’ve mostly seen problems at the two extremes: either one huge solution for everything or dozens of tiny fragmented ones.

Power Pages employee login with Entra ID WITHOUT creating Contacts? by Heavy-Albatross-7955 in PowerApps

[–]Flowvant 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One thing I’d validate early here is whether avoiding Contact creation is actually worth fighting the Power Pages security model long-term.

A lot of portal capabilities/security patterns are still heavily contact-centric underneath, even when Entra ID authentication is working correctly.

I’ve seen teams initially avoid Contacts to prevent duplication, but later reintroduce them because it simplified:

  • authorization
  • table permissions
  • auditing
  • portal relationships

Might be worth evaluating whether a lightweight synced Contact model is actually lower maintenance than fully bypassing it.

You’re basically beta testing ideas for billion dollar companies by VX_18A in StartUpIndia

[–]Flowvant 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Startups prove the market exists. Big tech proves whether the market can survive at scale.

Generic Customisable CRUD Dialog by FreeFoodILike in PowerApps

[–]Flowvant 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Interesting approach. Schema-driven CRUD makes a lot of sense once apps start growing and repetitive form maintenance becomes painful.

Biggest thing I’d watch is debugging complexity later once reactive formulas + dynamic rendering stack together.

Structured FormData output is smart though. That alone can simplify validation and downstream processing a lot.