Find everything you need to get certified on Fabric—skills challenges, live sessions, exam prep, role guidance, and more. Get started
You would need to have a separate query for each table that you want to end up in Power BI. Use the same join conditions and where clause for each query, just change the columns that you select to only give the columns you want in that particular table.
Both methods worked correctly, which one is better from a star schema perspective?
Is that the only possible way? Without the query total size is 150MB but with the separate query it's 200 MB size which is a bit strange . I am guessing even with the increase size from seperate query the performance should be better than having them all in one table?
You would need to have a separate query for each table that you want to end up in Power BI. Use the same join conditions and where clause for each query, just change the columns that you select to only give the columns you want in that particular table.
Both methods worked correctly, which one is better from a star schema perspective?
Is that the only possible way? Without the query total size is 150MB but with the separate query it's 200 MB size which is a bit strange . I am guessing even with the increase size from seperate query the performance should be better than having them all in one table?
Yes, the increase in size shouldn't affect performance enough to offset the benefits of having a proper star schema
Check out the September 2024 Power BI update to learn about new features.
Learn from experts, get hands-on experience, and win awesome prizes.
User | Count |
---|---|
112 | |
93 | |
90 | |
35 | |
35 |
User | Count |
---|---|
154 | |
102 | |
82 | |
64 | |
54 |