<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Issue with Generic DLT Pipeline Handling Multiple BUs in Data Engineering</title>
    <link>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/issue-with-generic-dlt-pipeline-handling-multiple-bus/m-p/107794#M42921</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;We are implementing a data ingestion framework where data flows from a foreign catalog (source) to a raw layer (Delta tables) and then to a bronze layer (DLT streaming tables). Currently, each Business Unit (BU) has a separate workflow and DLT pipeline (e.g., BU1 → Workflow1 &amp;amp; DLT1, BU2 → Workflow2 &amp;amp; DLT2).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;To improve efficiency, we aim to create a &lt;STRONG&gt;generic workflow and DLT pipeline&lt;/STRONG&gt; that supports multiple BUs without maintaining separate workflows. While workflow-level adjustments are feasible, the challenge arises at the &lt;STRONG&gt;DLT pipeline level&lt;/STRONG&gt;:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;If we modify the &lt;STRONG&gt;path where table metadata is stored&lt;/STRONG&gt;, tables get &lt;STRONG&gt;dropped from the catalog&lt;/STRONG&gt;, impacting the pipeline.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;We need a way to &lt;STRONG&gt;segregate BU-specific tables&lt;/STRONG&gt; within the same DLT pipeline while ensuring they persist across updates.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2025 12:02:42 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>RamanBajetha</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-01-30T12:02:42Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Issue with Generic DLT Pipeline Handling Multiple BUs</title>
      <link>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/issue-with-generic-dlt-pipeline-handling-multiple-bus/m-p/107794#M42921</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We are implementing a data ingestion framework where data flows from a foreign catalog (source) to a raw layer (Delta tables) and then to a bronze layer (DLT streaming tables). Currently, each Business Unit (BU) has a separate workflow and DLT pipeline (e.g., BU1 → Workflow1 &amp;amp; DLT1, BU2 → Workflow2 &amp;amp; DLT2).&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;To improve efficiency, we aim to create a &lt;STRONG&gt;generic workflow and DLT pipeline&lt;/STRONG&gt; that supports multiple BUs without maintaining separate workflows. While workflow-level adjustments are feasible, the challenge arises at the &lt;STRONG&gt;DLT pipeline level&lt;/STRONG&gt;:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;If we modify the &lt;STRONG&gt;path where table metadata is stored&lt;/STRONG&gt;, tables get &lt;STRONG&gt;dropped from the catalog&lt;/STRONG&gt;, impacting the pipeline.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;We need a way to &lt;STRONG&gt;segregate BU-specific tables&lt;/STRONG&gt; within the same DLT pipeline while ensuring they persist across updates.&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Jan 2025 12:02:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/issue-with-generic-dlt-pipeline-handling-multiple-bus/m-p/107794#M42921</guid>
      <dc:creator>RamanBajetha</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-01-30T12:02:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Issue with Generic DLT Pipeline Handling Multiple BUs</title>
      <link>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/issue-with-generic-dlt-pipeline-handling-multiple-bus/m-p/108245#M43006</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;You can create separate schemas within the same catalog for each BU. For example, you can have schemas like &lt;CODE&gt;BU1_schema&lt;/CODE&gt;, &lt;CODE&gt;BU2_schema&lt;/CODE&gt;, etc., within the same catalog.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;By using Unity Catalog, you can segregate BU-specific tables within the same DLT pipeline&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://docs.databricks.com/en/delta-live-tables/unity-catalog.html" target="_blank"&gt;https://docs.databricks.com/en/delta-live-tables/unity-catalog.html&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 01 Feb 2025 04:45:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/issue-with-generic-dlt-pipeline-handling-multiple-bus/m-p/108245#M43006</guid>
      <dc:creator>NandiniN</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-02-01T04:45:24Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Issue with Generic DLT Pipeline Handling Multiple BUs</title>
      <link>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/issue-with-generic-dlt-pipeline-handling-multiple-bus/m-p/108508#M43070</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Thanks, &lt;a href="https://community.databricks.com/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/23233"&gt;@NandiniN&lt;/a&gt;, for your response. The requirement here is not about separating the schema, as we are already handling that with direct publishing mode.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;The question is whether we can use a single DLT pipeline to execute multiple groups of tables without causing previously created tables to be dropped from Unity Catalog.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For example, in the first DLT run, tables 1-50 are created in Unity Catalog. However, when we use the same DLT pipeline for another set of tables (51-100), the previously created tables (1-50) are dropped, and only tables 51-100 remain in Unity Catalog. We want to prevent this dropping behavior.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2025 06:01:35 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.databricks.com/t5/data-engineering/issue-with-generic-dlt-pipeline-handling-multiple-bus/m-p/108508#M43070</guid>
      <dc:creator>RamanBajetha</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-02-03T06:01:35Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

