Don't miss your chance to take the Fabric Data Engineer (DP-600) exam for FREE! Find out how by attending the DP-600 session on April 23rd (pacific time), live or on-demand.
Learn moreNext up in the FabCon + SQLCon recap series: The roadmap for Microsoft SQL and Maximizing Developer experiences in Fabric. All sessions are available on-demand after the live show. Register now
Good Afternoon,
I would like to be able to directly compare the time and resource utilisation for multiple methods of loading data. Specifically I would like to compare using a dataflow and a pipeline copy data activity for loading data from dataverse. Can anyone suggest a method that would give me this granularity of resource usage data?
Thanks in advance
Solved! Go to Solution.
Hi @JonBFabric , Thank you for reaching out to the Microsoft Community Forum.
There is currently no built in way in Fabric to directly compare CU consumption and execution time between a Dataverse load done via a dataflow and one done via a pipeline copy activity. Fabric does not expose ingestion method level benchmarking or side by side resource attribution. CU is surfaced as telemetry at the capacity, workspace and item execution level only.
The best approach today is to run controlled, isolated tests. Execute the dataflow refresh and the pipeline copy separately, using the same Dataverse tables and similar data volumes, on the same capacity. Use item history (dataflow refresh history and pipeline run details) to capture duration, then correlate those time windows with CU usage in the Capacity Metrics app. This allows you to reasonably attribute CU and time to each method, provided nothing else is running on the capacity during those windows.
The upcoming Capacity Operation Events preview will improve visibility by exposing operation level CU events, making this correlation cleaner, but it still won’t automatically compare ingestion methods for you. Even with that preview, a controlled test setup will remain necessary to get a fair and defensible comparison.
Hi @JonBFabric , Thank you for reaching out to the Microsoft Community Forum.
There is currently no built in way in Fabric to directly compare CU consumption and execution time between a Dataverse load done via a dataflow and one done via a pipeline copy activity. Fabric does not expose ingestion method level benchmarking or side by side resource attribution. CU is surfaced as telemetry at the capacity, workspace and item execution level only.
The best approach today is to run controlled, isolated tests. Execute the dataflow refresh and the pipeline copy separately, using the same Dataverse tables and similar data volumes, on the same capacity. Use item history (dataflow refresh history and pipeline run details) to capture duration, then correlate those time windows with CU usage in the Capacity Metrics app. This allows you to reasonably attribute CU and time to each method, provided nothing else is running on the capacity during those windows.
The upcoming Capacity Operation Events preview will improve visibility by exposing operation level CU events, making this correlation cleaner, but it still won’t automatically compare ingestion methods for you. Even with that preview, a controlled test setup will remain necessary to get a fair and defensible comparison.
Hi @JonBFabric,
If you want to get capacity utilization data, I recommend waiting until this preview comes out:
This should allow you to see exactly how much CU is being consumed.
Other than that, the best approach is to use the Capacity Metrics app and wait for data to appear, can take between 10-20 minutes.
If you found this helpful, consider giving some Kudos. If I answered your question or solved your problem, mark this post as the solution.
Proud to be a Super User! | |
Experience the highlights from FabCon & SQLCon, available live and on-demand starting April 14th.
If you have recently started exploring Fabric, we'd love to hear how it's going. Your feedback can help with product improvements.
Share feedback directly with Fabric product managers, participate in targeted research studies and influence the Fabric roadmap.
| User | Count |
|---|---|
| 7 | |
| 3 | |
| 3 | |
| 3 | |
| 3 |