Forum Discussion

Ifevadia's avatar
Ifevadia
Copper Contributor
Jul 08, 2026

Identifying removed Fabric Assets

Is there any way for a data steward to identify a deleted physical asset ingested from Fabric into Purview. The original asset has been deleted in Fabric and another has been created with the exact same name, both assets now show in the catalogue and there doesn't seem to be a way to distinguish clearly which is the deleted and which is the current. 

assets
catalog
Fabric

2 Replies

  • Ifevadia's avatar
    Ifevadia
    Copper Contributor
    Jul 13, 2026

    Thanks Jamony, agree we definitely do not want to use the display name to identify what is current or latest, but doesnt seem to be an easy way to identify these unless you have self identified the assets, then having to click into each one to compare the details  you mention, when you have a high number of assets already it would be very difficult to do.

    Even if we could add last modified date or qualified name or any other indicator as a column when browsing the data asset page, this could be useful as currently all we see is item name and type . Other similar products i have used in the past would notify and have a review action following a scan, x number added, x number updated, x number removed/cannot be found 

  • Jamony's avatar
    Jamony
    MCT
    Jul 08, 2026

    Hi, I would avoid using the display name to decide which asset is current. In Purview, two assets can look almost identical if the same Fabric item name was deleted and recreated.

     

    The better clues are the qualified name, source object ID, path, scan time, last modified time, and lineage. The recreated Fabric item should normally have a different underlying identifier even if the friendly name is the same.

     

    I would check the asset details and scan history in Purview, then run a fresh scan of the Fabric source if possible. If the old item remains in the catalog after the source no longer exists, it may need to age out through scanning or be manually curated/deleted depending on your governance process. For stewardship, I would make the qualified name or source ID visible in your review workflow so stewards are not forced to work from name alone.