Configure "Incremental Update" for lookup table

[Anonymous]

Hi, 

I want to know the "right way" to configure "incremental update" for lookup tables. 

Currently I have this lookup table (not fact table) to be included as part of the incremental logic. This table has 2 audit columns (see pic 1)

1. created timestamp -- when record 1st created timstamp
2. last modified timestamp - when record last updated timestamp

Pic 1

Since any rows of the data can be changed at anytime. Currently I have this Incremental update configured as such, 

Am I wrong ? (see pic 2) 

I purposefully configured the years = 100 for this discussion. As there is no "shelf-life" for this data. 

Appreciate any comments or inputs. 

Pic 2:

[amitchandak]

@Anonymous , 100 years is a big duration, but configuration seems fine.

[Anonymous]

Thanks @amitchandak !  🙂

[v-lionel-msft]

Hi @Anonymous ,

Your configuration will refresh the data 100 years before the current date every time, which is estimated to be no different from full refresh.

I suggest you refer to the official documentation.

Refresh ranges 

Best regards,
Lionel Chen

If this post helps, then please consider Accept it as the solution to help the other members find it more quickly.

[Anonymous]

@v-lionel-msft 

Thanks for your comment. 

The changes of data for lookup tables can be any rows. I am not able to partition changes by "Date". Hence, always looking to update any rows @ anytime. 

Since the current "Incremental Update" works well with transactional table. Would it be correct to say that I potentially gain better performance by not including these standing tables in "Incremental Update"? 

What's your take ? 

[v-lionel-msft · Accepted solution]

Hi @Anonymous ,

According to my understanding, if the 100-year data is refreshed every time, it is no different from the full refresh, which does not reflect the advantages of incremental refresh.

Best regards,
Lionel Chen

If this post helps, then please consider Accept it as the solution to help the other members find it more quickly.

[Anonymous]

Thanks Lionel for confirming my doubt. 

In this case, I will not include standing tables into increment update config. It doesn't help or make sense.