Defining the Raw Data Vault with Artificial Intelligence
This Article is Authored By Michael Olschimke, co-founder and CEO at Scalefree International GmbH. The Technical Review is done by Ian Clarke, Naveed Hussain – GBBs (Cloud Scale Analytics) for EMEA at Microsoft The Data Vault concept is used across the industry to build robust and agile data solutions. Traditionally, the definition (and subsequent modelling) of the Raw Data Vault, which captures the unmodified raw data, is done manually. This work demands significant human intervention and expertise. However, with the advent of artificial intelligence (AI), we are witnessing a paradigm shift in how we approach this foundational task. This article explores the transformative potential of leveraging AI to define the Raw Data Vault, demonstrating how intelligent automation can enhance efficiency, accuracy, and scalability, ultimately unlocking new levels of insight and agility for organizations. Note that this article describes a solution to AI-generated Raw Data Vault models. However, the solution is not limited to Data Vault, but allows the definition of any data-driven, schema-on-read model to integrate independent data sets in an enterprise environment. We discuss this towards the end of this article. Metadata-Driven Data Warehouse Automation In the early days of Data Vault, all engineering was done manually: an engineer would analyse the data sources and their datasets, come up with a Raw Data Vault model in an E/R tool or Microsoft Visio, and then develop both the DDL code (CREATE TABLE) and the ELT / ETL code (INSERT INTO statements). However, Data Vault follows many patterns. Hubs look very similar (the difference lies in the business keys) and are loaded similarly. We discussed these patterns in previous articles of this series, for example, when covering the Data Vault model and implementation. In most projects where Data Vault entities are created and loaded manually, a data engineer eventually develops the idea of creating a metadata-driven Data Vault generator due to these existing patterns. The effort to build a generator is too considerable, and most projects are better off using an off-the-shelf solution such as Vaultspeed. These tools come with a metadata repository and a user interface for setting up the metadata and code templates required to generate the Raw Data Vault (and often subsequent layers). We have discussed Vaultspeed in previous articles of this series. By applying the code templates to the metadata defined by the user, the actual code for the physical model is generated for a data platform, such as Microsoft Fabric. The code templates define the appearance of hubs, links, and satellites, as well as how they are loaded. The metadata defines which hubs, links, and satellites should exist to capture the incoming data set consistently. Manual development often introduces mistakes and errors that result in deviations in code quality. By generating the data platform code, deviations from the defined templates are not possible (without manual intervention), thus raising the overall quality. But the major driver for most project teams is to increase productivity. Instead of manually developing code, they generate the code. Metadata-driven generation of the Raw Data Vault is standard practice in today's projects. Today’s project tasks have therefore changed: while engineers still need to analyse the source data sets and develop a Raw Data Vault model, they no longer create the code (DDL/ELT). Instead, they set up the metadata that represents the Raw Data Vault model in the tool of their choice. Each data warehouse automation tool comes with its specific features, limitations, and metadata formats. The data engineer/modeler must understand how to transfer the Raw Data Vault model into the data warehouse automation tool by correctly setting up the metadata. This is also true for Vaultspeed; the data modeler can set up the metadata either through the user interface or via the SDK. This is the most labour-intensive task concerning the Raw Data Vault layer. It also requires experts who not only know Data Vault modelling but also know (or can analyse) the source systems' data and understand the selected data warehouse automation solution. Additionally, Data Vault is not equal to Data Vault in many cases, as it allows for a very flexible interpretation of how to model a Data Vault, which also leads to quality issues. But what if the organization has no access to such experts? What if budgets are limited, time is of the essence, or there are no available experts in sufficient numbers in the field? As Data Vault experts, we can debate the value of Data Vault as much as we want, but if there are no experts capable of modeling it, the debate will remain inconclusive. And what if this problem is only getting worse? In the past, a few dozen source tables might have been sufficient to be processed by the data platform. Today, several hundred source tables could be considered a medium-sized data platform. Tomorrow, there will be thousands of source tables. The reason? There is not only an exponential growth in the volume of data to be produced and processed, but it also comes with an exponential growth in the complexity of data shape. The source of this exponential growth in data shape comes from more complex source databases, APIs that produce and deliver semi-structured JSON data, and, ultimately, more complex business processes and an increasing amount of generated and available data that needs to be analysed for meaningful business results. Generating the Data Vault using Artificial Intelligence Increasingly, this data is generated using artificial intelligence (AI) and still requires integration, transformation, and analysis. The issue is that the number of data engineers, data modelers, and data scientists is not growing exponentially. Universities around the world only produce a limited number of these roles, and some of us would like to retire one day. Based on our experience, the increase in these roles is linear at best. Even if you argue for exponential growth in these roles, it is evident that there is no debate about a growing gap between the increasing data volume and the people who should analyse it. This gap cannot be closed by humans in the future. Even in a world where all kids want to become and eventually work in a data role. Sorry for all the pilots, police officers, nurses, doctors, etc., there is no way for you to retire without the whole economy imploding. Therefore, the only way to close the gap is through the use of artificial intelligence. It is not about reducing the data roles. It's about making them efficient so that they can deal with the growing data shape (and not just the volume). For a long time, it was common sense in the industry that, if an artificial intelligence could generate or define the Raw Data Vault, it would be an assisting technology. The AI would make recommendations, for example, such as which hubs or links to model and which business keys to use. The human data modeler would make the final decision, with input from the AI. But what if the AI made the final decision? What would it look like? What if one could attach data sources to the AI platform and the AI would analyze the source datasets, come up with a Raw Data Vault model, and load that model into Vaultspeed or another data warehouse automation tool, know the source system’s data, know Data Vault modelling, and understand the selected data warehouse automation? These questions were posed by Michael Olschimke, a Data Vault and AI expert, when initially considering the challenge. He researched the distribution of neural networks on massively parallel processing (MPP) clusters to classify unstructured data at Santa Clara University in Silicon Valley. This prior AI research, combined with the knowledge he accumulated in the Data Vault, enabled him to build a solution that later became known as Flow.BI. Flow.BI as a Generative AI to Define the Raw Data Vault The solution is simple, at least from the outside: attach a few data sources, let the AI do the rest. Flow.BI supports several data sources already, including Microsoft SQL Server and derivatives, such as Synapse and Fabric, as long as a JDBC driver is available, Flow.BI should eventually be able to analyze the data source. And the AI doesn’t care if the data originates from a CRM system, such as Microsoft Dynamics, or an e-commerce platform; it's just data. There are no provisions in the code to deal with specific datasets, at least for now. The goal of Flow.BI is to produce a valid, that is, consistent and integrated, enterprise data model. Typically, this follows a Data Vault design, but it's not limited to that (we’ll discuss this later in the article). This is achieved by following a strict data-driven approach that imitates the human data modeler. Flow.BI needs data to make decisions, just like its human counterpart. Source entities with no data will be ignored. It only requires some metadata, such as the available entities and their columns. Datatypes are nice-to-have; primary keys and foreign keys would improve the target model, just like entity and column descriptions. But they are not required to define a valid Raw Data Vault model. Humans write this text, and as such, we like to influence the result of the modelling exercise. Flow.BI is appreciating this by offering many options for the human data modeler to influence the engine. Some of them will be discussed in this article, but there are many more already available and more to come. Flow.BI’s user interface is kept as lean and straightforward as possible: the solution is designed so that the AI should take the lead and model the whole Raw Data Vault. The UI’s purpose is to interact with human data modelers, allowing them to influence the results. That’s what many screens are related to - and the configuration of the security system. A client can have multiple instances, which result in independent Data Vault models. This is particularly useful when dealing with independent data platforms, such as those used by HR, the compliance department, or specific business use cases, or when creating the raw data foundation for data products within a data mesh. In this case, a Flow.BI instance equals a data product. But don’t underestimate the complexity of Flow.BI: The frontend is used to manage a large number of compute clusters that implement scalable agents to work on defining the Raw Data Vault. The platform is implementing full separation of data and processing, not only by client but also by instance. Mapping Raw Data to Organizational Ontology The very first step in the process is to identify the concepts in the attached datasets. For this purpose, there is a concept classifier that analyses the data and recognizes datasets and their classified concepts that it has seen in the past. A common requirement of clients is that they would like to leverage their organizational requirements in this process. While Flow.BI doesn’t know a client’s ontology; it is possible to override (and in some cases, complete) the concept classifications and refer to concepts from the organizational ontology. By doing so, Flow.BI will integrate the source system’s raw data into the organization's ontology. It will not create a logical Data Vault, which is where the Data Vault model reflects the desired business, but instead model the raw data as the business uses it, and therefore follow the data-driven Data Vault modeling principles that Michael Olschimke has taught to thousands of students over the years at Scalefree. Flow.BI also allows the definition of a multi-tenant Data Vault model, where source systems either provide multi-tenant data or are assigned to a specific tenant. In both cases, the integrated enterprise data model will be extended to allow queries across multiple tenants or within a single tenant, depending on the information consumer’s needs. Ensuring Security and Privacy Flow.BI was designed with security and privacy in mind. From a design perspective, this has two aspects: Security and privacy in the service itself, to protect client solutions and related assets Security and privacy are integral to the defined model, allowing for the effective utilization of Data Vault’s capabilities in addressing security and privacy requirements, such as satellite splits. While Flow.BI is using a shared architecture; all data and metadata storage and processing are separated by client and instance. However, this is often not sufficient for clients as they hesitate to share their highly sensitive data with a third party. For this reason, Flow.BI allows two critical features: Local data storage: instead of storing client data on Flow.BI infrastructure, the client provides an Azure Data Lake Storage to be used for storing the data. Local data processing: A Docker container can be deployed into the client’s infrastructure to access the client's data sources, extract the data, and process it. When using both options, only metadata, such as entity and column names, constraints, and descriptions, are shared with Flow.BI. No data is transferred from the client’s infrastructure to Flow.BI. The metadata is secured on Flow.BI’s premises as if it were actual data: row-level security separates the metadata by instance, and roles and permissions are defined per client who can access the metadata and what they can do with it. But security and privacy are not limited to the service itself. The defined model also utilizes the security and privacy features of Data Vault. For example, it enables the classification of source columns based on security and privacy. The user can set up security and privacy classes and apply them to the influence screen for both. By doing so, the column classifications are used when defining the Raw Data Vault and can later be used to implement a satellite split in the physical model (if necessary). An upcoming release will include an AI model for classifying columns based on privacy, utilizing data and metadata to automate this task. Tackling Multilingual Challenges A common challenge for clients is navigating multilingual data environments. Many data sources use English entity and column names, but there are systems using metadata in a different language. Also, the assumption that the data platform should use English metadata is not always correct. Especially in government clients, the use of the official language is mandatory. Both options, translating the source metadata to English (the default within Flow.BI) and translating the defined target model into any target language, are supported by Flow.BI’s translations tab on the influence screen: The tab utilizes an AI translator to fully automatically translate the incoming table names, column names, and concept names. However, the user can step in and override the translation to improve it to their needs. All strings of the source metadata and the defined model are passed through the translation module. It is also possible to reuse existing translations for a growing list of popular data sources. This feature enables readable names for satellites and their attributes (as well as hubs and links), resulting in a significantly improved user experience for the defined Raw Data Vault. Generating the Physical Model You should have noticed by now that we consistently discuss the defined Raw Data Vault model. Flow.BI is not generating the physical model, that is, the CREATE TABLE and INSERT INTO statements for the Raw Data Vault. Instead, it “just” defines the hubs, links, and satellites required for capturing all incoming data from the attached data sources, including business key selection, satellite splits, and special entity types, such as non-historized links and their satellites, multi-active satellites, hierarchical links, effectivity satellites, and reference tables. Video on Generating Physical Models This logical model (not to be confused with “logical Data Vault modelling”) is then provided to our growing number of ISV partner solutions that will consume our defined model, set up the required metadata in their tool, and generate the physical model. As a result, Flow.BI acts as a team member that analyses your organizational data sources and their data, knows how to model the Raw Data Vault, and how to set up metadata in the tool of your choice. The metadata is provided by Flow.BI can be used to model the landing zone/staging area (either on a data lake or a relational database such as Microsoft Fabric) and the Raw Data Vault in a data-driven Data Vault architecture, which is the recommended practice. With this in mind, Flow.BI is not a competition to Vaultspeed or your other existing data warehouse automation solution, but a valid extension that integrates with your existing tool stack. This makes it much easier to justify the introduction of Flow.BI to the project. Going Beyond Data Vault Flow.BI is not limited to the definition of Data Vault models. While it has been designed with the Data Vault concepts in mind, a customizable expert system is used to define the Data Vault model. Although the expert system is not yet publicly available, it has already been implemented and is in use for every model generation. This expert system enables the implementation of alternative data models, provided they adhere to data-driven, schema-on-read principles. Data Vault is such an example, but many others are possible, as well: Customized Data Vault models Inmon-style enterprise models in third-normal form (3NF, if no business logic is required Kimball-style analytical models with facts and dimensions, again without business logic Semi-structured JSON and XML document collections Key-value stores “One Big Table (OBT)” models “Many Big Related Table (MBRT)” models Okay, we’ve just invented the MBRT model as we're writing the article, but you get the idea: many large, fully denormalized tables with foreign–key relationships between each other. If you've developed your data-driven model, please get in touch with us. About the Authors Michael Olschimke is co-founder and CEO of Flow.BI, a generative AI that defines integrated enterprise data models, such as (but not limited to) Data Vault. Michael has trained thousands of industry data warehousing professionals, taught academic classes, and published regularly on topics around data platforms, data engineering, and Data Vault. He has over two decades of experience in information technology, with a specialization in business intelligence topics, artificial intelligence and data platforms. <<< Back to Blog Series Title Page
Device Tables are not ingesting tables for an orgs workspace
Device Tables are not ingesting tables for an orgs workspace. I can confirm that all devices are enrolled and onboarded to MDE (Microsoft defender for endpoint) I had placed an EICAR file on one of the machine which bought an alert through to sentinel,however this did not invoke any of the device related tables . Workspace i am targeting Workspace from another org with tables enabled and ingesting data Microsoft Defender XDR connector shows as connected however the tables do not seem to be ingesting data; I run the following; DeviceEvents | where TimeGenerated > ago(15m) | top 20 by TimeGenerated DeviceProcessEvents | where TimeGenerated > ago(15m) | top 20 by TimeGenerated I receive no results; No results found from the specified time range Try selecting another time range Please assist As I cannot think where this is failing
Secure Medallion Architecture Pattern on Azure Databricks (Part I)
This article presents a security-first pattern for Azure Databricks: a Medallion Architecture where Bronze, Silver and Gold each run as their Lakeflow Job and cluster, orchestrated by a parent job. Run-as identities are Microsoft Entra service principals; storage access is governed via Unity Catalog External Locations backed by the Access Connector’s managed identity. Least-privilege is enforced with cluster policies and UC grants. Prefer managed tables to unlock Predictive Optimisation, Automatic liquid clustering and Automatic statistics. Secrets live in Azure Key Vault and are read at runtime. Monitor reliability and cost with system tables and Jobs UI. Part II covers more low-level concepts and CI/CD.
Sentinel Data Connector: Google Workspace (G Suite) (using Azure Functions)
I'm encountering a problem when attempting to run the GWorkspace_Report workbook in Azure Sentinel. The query is throwing this error related to the union operator: 'union' operator: Failed to resolve table expression named 'GWorkspace_ReportsAPI_gcp_CL' I've double-checked, and the GoogleWorkspaceReports connector is installed and updated to version 3.0.2. Has anyone seen this or know what might be causing the table GWorkspace_ReportsAPI_gcp_CL to be unresolved? Thanks!Azure Data Factory, SQL Managed Instance, and SSIS Implementation
Co-Authored By: Rafia_Aqil This guide provides step-by-step instructions for enabling Azure Data Factory (ADF), connecting it with Azure SQL Managed Instance (SQLMI), provisioning SSIS runtime, running SSIS packages, and integrating with Microsoft Fabric (Power BI). It is intended for cloud solution architects and data engineering teams deploying enterprise-scale data solutions. Enabling the ADF Instance Create an Azure Data Factory Follow the official Microsoft Learn guide to set up your ADF instance. Required Roles You must have Contributor, Owner, or Administrator permissions on the subscription or resource group to deploy and configure the ADF resource. Granting Initial Access to the Data Engineering Team Initial Access How to set permissions in ADF ? - Microsoft Q&A Assign Data Factory Contributor Role Grant the Data Factory Contributor role to your engineering team on the ADF resource. This enables them to log in, author pipelines, and manage linked services. Connecting Azure SQL Managed Instance with ADF Networking Options Use managed virtual networks and managed private endpoints: Managed virtual network and managed private endpoints - Azure Data Factory | Microsoft Learn. Alternatively, create a self-hosted integration runtime. Data Movement Copy and transform data in Azure SQL Managed Instance using ADF pipelines: Copy and transform data in Azure SQL Managed Instance - Azure Data Factory & Azure Synapse | Microsoft Learn 4. Creating SSIS Runtime Prerequisites Create an Azure-SSIS integration runtime in Azure Data Factory: Create an Azure-SSIS integration runtime in Azure Data Factory - Azure Data Factory | Microsoft Learn. Provisioning Provision the Azure-SSIS integration runtime: Provision the Azure-SSIS integration runtime - Azure Data Factory | Microsoft Learn Choose Enterprise Edition for advanced features: Provision Enterprise Edition for the Azure-SSIS Integration Runtime - Azure Data Factory | Microsoft Learn Enable Microsoft Entra authentication for secure access: Enable Microsoft Entra authentication for Azure SSIS integration runtime - Azure Data Factory | Microsoft Learn Join the Azure-SSIS integration runtime to a virtual network. Create a new subnet in the existing SQLMI VNET. Running SSIS Packages in ADF Deploy and Run Deploy and run SSIS packages in Azure using ADF: Deploy and run SSIS packages in Azure - SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) | Microsoft Learn Migrate on-premises SSIS workloads to SSIS in Azure Data Factory: Migrate on-premises SQL Server Integration Services (SSIS) workloads to SSIS in Azure Data Factory (ADF) - Azure Data Factory | Microsoft Learn Sending Data to Fabric (Power BI) Ingest Data Use the Azure Data Factory Copy activity to ingest data into Fabric (Power BI): How to ingest data into Fabric using the Azure Data Factory Copy activity - Azure Data Factory | Microsoft Learn Using ADF in Fabric for Mature, Deployment-Ready Workloads ADF Integration in Fabric Use Azure Data Factory items (Mount) in Microsoft Fabric for robust, production-ready workloads: How to Use Azure Data Factory item (Mount) in Microsoft Fabric - Microsoft Fabric | Microsoft Learn References: All steps and best practices are sourced from official Microsoft Learn documentations mentioned in this documentation.
From Doubt to Victory: How I Passed Microsoft SC-200
Hey everyone! I wanted to share my journey of how I went from doubting my chances to successfully passing the Microsoft SC-200 exam. At first, the idea of taking the SC-200 seemed overwhelming. With so many topics to cover, especially with the integration of Microsoft security technologies, I wasn’t sure if I could pull it off. But after months of studying and staying consistent, I finally passed! 🎉 Here’s what worked for me: Study Plan: I created a structured study schedule and stuck to it. I broke down each section of the exam objectives and allocated time for each part. Authentic Exam Questions: I used it-examstest for practice exams. Their realistic test format helped me get a good grasp of the exam pattern. Plus, the explanations for the answers were super helpful in understanding the concepts. Practice Exams: I did multiple mock tests. Honestly, they helped me more than I expected! They boosted my confidence, and I could pinpoint areas where I needed to improve. SC-200 Study Materials: I relied on a combination of online courses, books, and video resources. Watching the study videos and taking notes helped me retain the information better. Don’t Cram: I didn’t leave things to the last minute. It took me about 2-3 months of consistent study to get comfortable with the material. I made sure to take breaks and not burn myself out. Passing this exam felt amazing! If you're in the same boat and feeling uncertain, just stick with it! It’s a challenging exam, but with the right tools and preparation, you can do it. Keep pushing forward, and good luck to everyone! 💪 Would be happy to answer any questions if anyone has them!Issue while deploying Sentienl Rules
I know that when deleting a Sentinel rule, you need to wait a specific amount of time before it can be redeployed. However, in this tenant, we've been waiting for almost a month and are still getting the same deployment error ('was recently deleted. You need to allow some time before re-using the same ID. Please try again later. Click here for details'). I still want to use the same ID ect. Does anyone have any idea or similar issue why it's still not possible after waiting for about a month?Securing Azure Databricks Serverless: Practical Guide to Private Link Integration
The Challenge: Outbound Control in a Serverless World Serverless compute resources run in the serverless compute plane, and is managed by Microsoft, for ease of use. Databricks serverless provides hassle-free compute for running notebooks, jobs, and pipelines and by default, outbound traffic can reach the internet and other networks freely. One of the most common security requirements for customers in the financial and government sectors is to have the ability to retain network paths within a private network for their users to access their data and for system integration. Solution Objective Enforce deny-by-default posture: Control outbound access with granular precision by enabling a deny-by-default policy for internet. By default, all outbound access is blocked unless explicitly allowed via Private Endpoint Rules. Control outbound connections: by specifying allowed locations, connections, FQDN Enforce the traffic to go over the customer network for traffic controls and inspection Solution Overview The solution is designed to route Databricks Serverless outbound traffic to the customer customer-managed Policy Enforcement Point (e.g. Azure Firewall), to allow the customer to securely connect to services hosted on the cloud without exposing the data to the public internet. Essentially, it establishes a private, secure connection between Databricks Control Plane to the customer virtual network. Pre-Requisites Azure Firewall Deploy an Azure Firewall if you don’t already have one. Virtual Networks and Subnets Create a VNET for Databricks and Load Balancer deployment. Set up subnets for the Azure Standard Load Balancer frontend (e.g., 10.0.2.0/26) and backend (e.g., 10.0.2.64/26). Enable Private Endpoint network policy for Network Security Groups and Route Tables on the backend subnet. VNET Peering Peer the Databricks VNET with your hub VNET to allow secure routing. Azure Databricks Workspace Deploy an Azure Databricks workspace if you don’t have one. Follow the official Azure Databricks documentation for detailed steps on creating workspaces and private endpoints Summary of Steps Deploy Azure Firewall and Networking Set up an Azure Firewall and create the necessary virtual networks (VNets) and subnets for your environment. Peer the Databricks VNet with your hub VNet to enable secure routing. Configure the Azure Load Balancer Create an internal Standard Load Balancer. Set up frontend and backend pools using NICs (not IP addresses). Add load balancing rules and configure a health probe (typically HTTP on port 8082). Create a Private Link Service Deploy the Private Link Service behind the load balancer. Associate it with the correct frontend and backend subnets. Set Up Route Tables Create route tables to direct backend VM traffic to the Azure Firewall. Ensure the route tables are associated with the correct subnets (e.g., backend subnet for the router VM). Deploy and Configure the Router VM Deploy a Linux VM to act as a router. Enable IP forwarding on the VM and in Azure settings. Configure IPTables for NAT and traffic forwarding. Install and configure NGINX to serve as a health probe for the load balancer. Configure Network Security Groups (NSGs) Set up NSGs to allow necessary traffic (SSH, load balancer, HTTP/HTTPS, health probe) to and from the router VM. Configure Azure Firewall Application Rules Define application rules to allow outbound access only to approved FQDNs (e.g., microsoft.com). Block all other outbound traffic by default. Configure Databricks Account Portal Enable outbound (serverless) Azure Private Link to customer-managed resources in the Databricks Account Portal. Create Network Connectivity Configurations (NCCs) and attach them to your workspaces. Add private endpoint rules for each Azure resource you want to allow access to. Approve Private Endpoints In the Azure Portal, approve the private endpoint connections created by Databricks for your resources. Troubleshooting Use tools like netstat, conntrack, and tcpdump on the router VM to diagnose routing issues. Double-check route table and NSG associations. Validate private endpoint rule configurations in both Databricks and the Azure Portal. References Serverless compute plane networking - Azure Databricks | Microsoft Learn Configure private connectivity to Azure resources - Azure Databricks | Microsoft Learn Key Takeaway This solution enforces a deny-by-default posture for outbound traffic from Azure Databricks Serverless, only allowing explicitly approved connections via Private Endpoints. All traffic is routed through your network for inspection and control, helping you meet strict compliance and security requirements. Ready to Get Started? Securing your Databricks Serverless environment doesn’t have to be daunting. With Azure Private Link, Azure Firewall, and a smart configuration, you get the best of both worlds: agility and airtight security. For more details, check out the official Azure Databricks documentation and start building your secure analytics platform today. Questions or want to share your experience? Drop a comment below or reach out to the Azure Databricks community.Approaches to Integrating Azure Databricks with Microsoft Fabric: The Better Together Story!
Azure Databricks and Microsoft Fabric can be combined to create a unified and scalable analytics ecosystem. This document outlines eight distinct integration approaches, each accompanied by step-by-step implementation guidance and key design considerations. These methods are not prescriptive—your cloud architecture team can choose the integration strategy that best aligns with your organization’s governance model, workload requirements and platform preferences. Whether you prioritize centralized orchestration, direct data access, or seamless reporting, the flexibility of these options allows you to tailor the solution to your specific needs.
