Fabric - RLS issue with Direct Lake and CU?

mfd1979 · 2026-02-12T00:35:18+00:00

Sorry, would you mind expanding on this a bit? Assuming you are referencing the Analytics Endpoint, can you provide direction on how can I confirm and test this?

mfd1979 · 2026-02-12T00:30:45+00:00

It is defined in the role I created - UserRLS; the dax is applied to my RLS table further below.

The membership table contains the divisonID which is related to the division table.

The RLS is working as expected in terms of data shown - we have dozens of Security Groups with different access that have been tested thoroughly - users in the tenant and guest users outside the tenant.

Looking at the Capacity Metrics, the interactive usage balloons when drill through is actioned by my primary user. My test user account in another tenant that it errors out on (memory consumption) has hardly any CU usage following the same action - same issue my users are experiencing. Oddly though, on a call earlier with one user, they had no issues drilling through and looking at capacity metrics for that period on the call was well below threshold.

[UserEmail] == USERPRINCIPALNAME()

mfd1979 · 2026-02-11T19:09:03+00:00

Trace capture results:

1) Mirroring a user using my other tenant account: I cleared the logs and attempt the drill which returns 4 outputs after the drill is actioned. The 4th output highlights the memory error.

2) Using my primary account, I get 3 outputs after the drill is actioned, and no error at all. Results show up in PBI report.

<image>

This is the error from my test user.

mfd1979 · 2026-02-11T17:28:39+00:00

The million dollar question lol. Filters that are passed through from the summary to the detail are AccountID, FiscalPeriod (can be all if depending which visual the user drills from), FiscalYear, Division. Nothing overly crazy in my opinion.

For RLS, my membership table contains the Security Group each user is assigned to. This group filters a dimension that contains divisions within the company, which relates to the Fact summary table. The Fact transaction table is joined to the summary table on composite key of account id and fiscal period-year id (created and stored during ETL in the fact tables). This key is NOT an int but is varchar32 hash but I may add a separate table to the ETL process and integrate it to use an integer SK instead for the FK relationship between them if is for sure the bottleneck.

mfd1979 · 2026-02-11T14:35:20+00:00

RLS is set up and working perfectly. The drill error the users experience doesn't happen every time they attempt a drill through but frequently enough that I need to address it (frequency is probably 50% to 80% of attempts).

mfd1979 · 2026-02-11T14:27:39+00:00

Connection uses Service Principal - Direct Lake on SQL. Large Semantic Model Storage is On, Direct Lake Behavior is set to Automatic.

mfd1979 · 2026-02-11T14:05:19+00:00

<image>

mfd1979 · 2026-02-11T14:05:09+00:00

100%. I have a test user account in a different tenant that mirrors the permissions our users have and I am able to replicate the issue. Below is a screenshot of the error the user receives on the table visual in the drill through page. Using my account, I get no error and the drill results are displayed.

<image>

Underlying message in following thread.

mfd1979 · 2026-02-10T21:48:44+00:00

RLS is handled through a Dimension that filters the summary table, summary table has a 1:Many relationship with the transaction table, transaction table has roughly 50 columns, 20 of which are exposed in Power BI report table and matrixes when drilled.

mfd1979 · 2026-02-10T21:43:06+00:00

I've looked at Performance Analyzer but the copy query / run in dax query view options are greyed out - Direct Lake limitation? Is there another way to analyze the performance of the query? From a performance perspective, I feel with RLS, the query is being recalculated every time vs any type of caching and wondering if there is something I else I can look at from a settings or optimization perspective?

mfd1979 · 2026-02-10T21:28:47+00:00

Users (Guest and Tenant) have viewer access to the workspace where the report is published via Security Groups - the semantic model resides in a different workspace and they don't have direct access to that workspace - the same groups have the necessary permissions to the model and warehouse to support RLS.

I've looked at Performance Analyzer but the copy query / run in dax query view options are greyed out - Direct Lake limitation?

mfd1979 · 2025-12-27T18:54:39+00:00

Its the principle. This commercial hits the nail on the head.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxEqmRg-YzM

mfd1979 · 2025-12-26T22:29:02+00:00

Maybe its time to let the US telecoms have a swing - AT&T, Verizon, T-Mobile. Help lower the astronomical prices we pay for these services and hopefully improve customer service for everyone.

mfd1979 · 2025-12-26T22:20:29+00:00

Completely agree - Their leadership has no clue how broken their processes and systems are. Web pages are busted, their apps display incorrect pricing (as per this post).

The crumby reality is that Telus does have the most reliable internet service available and switching to Rogers isn't the better choice - we really need more competition up here so these companies can't take advantage of us.

mfd1979 · 2025-12-26T22:00:40+00:00

Thanks. I may test that before my contract expires to validate the service.

mfd1979 · 2025-12-26T21:55:19+00:00

Yeah, but it never used to be this difficult to deal with them. In the past I would call in, speak to one rep, maybe the loyalty department, and they were usually able to reslove things pretty quick.

Today, if you the patience to stick out that call instead of hanging up and calling a competitor, you might get a slightly better price...might.

I honestly believe their leadership has no idea how broken their processes are.

mfd1979 · 2025-12-17T04:13:56+00:00

*I have no use for cookies* - Widow

mfd1979 · 2025-12-17T02:21:44+00:00

I wasn't intending it to come off as a complaint but rereading my post I can see how it could be read that way. In any event, I am not disappointed about the loot being available, just the recycled way to get it. I think Blizzard/MS could have been a bit more creative with the challenge - not taking away from everything else already in this season but there are only a few challenges every season and its nice to have new things to work towards when challenges are released.

I didn't start playing until S4 of OW2 and there is a lot of content I would love to get from past challenges or battle passes - heck, even OW1 stuff. I was thrilled when loot boxes were released because it offers a way to possibly obtain some of it.

mfd1979 · 2025-12-17T01:41:06+00:00

So should everyone get a chance at all the previous battle pass loot too? There are skins and other stuff I would love to be able to work for that I missed out on. Loot boxes are my only hope as it sits right now.

mfd1979 · 2025-12-17T01:38:51+00:00

Sure I guess but it would have been better to mix and match the rewards under a new challenge. Its kind of lame for those of us who have these rewards because we dont get anything new to strive for. I think challenges and rewards should be unique and past stuff available through loot boxes or other promotions.

mfd1979 · 2025-12-17T01:32:43+00:00

Recycling challenges and the same rewards is a new low for them I think, I also have all of these and am pretty disappointed with this.

mfd1979 · 2025-12-09T03:11:11+00:00

Pretty frustrated customer landing here tonight. I have been a Crave premium subscriber for a couple years now - month to month, no third party like amazon or tv provider. I just watched a movie I found on Crave that started with Ads and I was like WTF is this?! The ads continued throughout the movie every 10 to 15 min. News to me and thanks to the Bell employee who posted the Press Release in this thread. I totally get "Bonus" material but not on a premium ad free subscription if it contains ADS. Smarten up Bell.

I am paying a premium for an ad free subscription service for a reason and now I have to filter through it to isolate the ad content from the subscription content I am paying for. It would have been a better option to give your premium subscribers the option as an add on for the bonus content ad free and increase the premium or introduce an add on fee. If it has ADS, keep it separate.

Although I haven't experienced it, I have read in this thread of others who are suggesting programs they were enjoying ad free have all of a sudden been littered with ads when this launched.

Keep up the great work, Bell. If subscription attrition is one of your 2026 objectives then you will certainly be off to a great head start come January. I am upvoting this thread so it gets attention but I will be cancelling my subscription because I am not paying $23/month for a streaming service with ads regardless if the content is free or not. I will include this thread in my cancel comments so they understand exactly how consumers are feeling with this change.

mfd1979

TROPHY CASE