Earn a 50% discount on the DP-600 certification exam by completing the Fabric 30 Days to Learn It challenge.
Problem
Query to $SYSTEM.TMSCHEMA_ROLE_MEMBERSHIPS is now returning an empty table for semantic model with RLS entries.
Background
let
#"Role Memberships" = AnalysisServices.Database(#"Workspace Name", #"Dataset Name", [Query="select * from $SYSTEM.TMSCHEMA_ROLE_MEMBERSHIPS", Implementation="2.0"])
in
#"Role Memberships"
Does anybody have any ideas? A complete rebuild/reload would be a fairly hefty undertaking so I'm trying to avoid.
Or is this going to be another MS ticket?
We are facing the same issue. Did you find a way to solve the problem?
In short, nope.
It's been a while, and was only put on the back burner due to other priorities, but I'll be raising with MS.
Hi @hinin ,
there are a couple of avenues we can explore to address this issue without resorting to a complete rebuild or reload of your semantic model:
1. Check for Recent Changes: Since you mentioned that this issue has arisen recently, it would be beneficial to review any changes made to the semantic model or the environment. This includes updates to Power BI service, changes in the deployment pipeline, or modifications to the model itself. Sometimes, even minor changes can have unexpected impacts on system queries.
2. Validate Model Compatibility and Settings: Ensure that your semantic model and the Power BI environment are fully compatible with the latest updates and features. Specifically, verify if there have been any updates or changes in how Power BI handles system queries for semantic models with RLS. The documentation on [Row-Level Security (RLS) permissions in Power BI](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/power-bi/developer/embedded/generate-embed-token) and [Power BI implementation planning for security](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/power-bi/guidance/powerbi-implementation-planning-security-report-...) might provide some insights into any recent changes or requirements.
Best Regards,
Xianda Tang
If this post helps, then please consider Accept it as the solution to help the other members find it more quickly.
Unforunately this doesn't help.
On a direct model-model comparison, the only differences are the id GUID, the RLS member entries, and a couple of Parameter values.
It's not a new model, and any recent changes have largely been very well understood (such as adjusting a measure's filters or redirecting to pull an incidental lookup table from a different data source) and should not impact the RLS.
User | Count |
---|---|
93 | |
84 | |
78 | |
75 | |
66 |
User | Count |
---|---|
115 | |
105 | |
93 | |
65 | |
60 |