Forum Discussion

Element115's avatar
Element115
Memorable Member
2 years ago
Solved

BUG::Data destination can't be set. Vague error msg produced.

In a new data flow, when I try to set the data destination to an existing lakehouse as a new table, this error message shows up.  I tried later again and again, and now it's been 4+ hours this is goi...
Dataflows
  • v-cboorla-msft's avatar
    v-cboorla-msft
    2 years ago

    Hi Element115 

     

    Thanks for using Microsoft Fabric Community.

    Apologies for the inconvenience.

    I tried to repro the scenario and didn't find any difficulty in choosing the data destination as Lakehouse. For reference please find the screenshot.

     

    If you are using an on-premises as data source with Dataflow Gateway might cause connectivity problems. The firewall might be blocking communication between the gateway and the destination (lakehouse or warehouse).

    For more details please refer : Solution: Set new firewall rules on server running the gateway

     

    In case the issue still persists, please do let us know. Glad to help.

    I hope this information helps.

     

    Thanks.

v-cboorla-msft's avatar
v-cboorla-msft
Microsoft Employee
2 years ago

Hi Element115 

 

Thanks for using Microsoft Fabric Community.

Apologies for the inconvenience.

I tried to repro the scenario and didn't find any difficulty in choosing the data destination as Lakehouse. For reference please find the screenshot.

 

If you are using an on-premises as data source with Dataflow Gateway might cause connectivity problems. The firewall might be blocking communication between the gateway and the destination (lakehouse or warehouse).

For more details please refer : Solution: Set new firewall rules on server running the gateway

 

In case the issue still persists, please do let us know. Glad to help.

I hope this information helps.

 

Thanks.

Element115's avatar
Element115
Memorable Member
2 years ago

Re the firewall, already done a long time ago. Also already tested a couple of DFs ingesting from the on-prem DB and this did not occur at the time.  

 

Also, should have said this was another test at the behest of the SE, case #2401190040000098.