Skip to content

fix: Troubleshoot Azure RBAC limits #124933

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
Court72 merged 4 commits into from
May 19, 2025
Merged

fix: Troubleshoot Azure RBAC limits #124933

Court72 merged 4 commits into from
May 19, 2025

Conversation

@ThomVanL
Copy link
Contributor

@ThomVanL ThomVanL commented Nov 25, 2024

Provided fixes for:

  • "Solution 2 - Remove Redundant Role Assignments" when using the conditions query. The condition column was missing in the summarize operator statement.
  • The name 'AuthorizationResources' does not refer to any known table, tabular variable or function. According to the KQL entity naming rules, a table entity name is case-sensitive.

@prmerger-automator
Copy link
Contributor

prmerger-automator bot commented Nov 25, 2024

@ThomVanL : Thanks for your contribution! The author(s) have been notified to review your proposed change.

@prmerger-automator prmerger-automator bot requested a review from rolyon November 25, 2024 13:13
@learn-build-service-prod
Copy link
Contributor

learn-build-service-prod bot commented Nov 25, 2024

Learn Build status updates of commit fa8f289:

✅ Validation status: passed

File Status Preview URL Details
articles/role-based-access-control/includes/query/authorization-same-principal-scope-condition.md ✅Succeeded
articles/role-based-access-control/includes/query/authorization-same-principal-scope.md ✅Succeeded
articles/role-based-access-control/includes/query/authorization-same-role-principal-condition.md ✅Succeeded
articles/role-based-access-control/includes/query/authorization-unused-custom-roles.md ✅Succeeded

For more details, please refer to the build report.

For any questions, please:

@Court72
Copy link
Contributor

Court72 commented Nov 25, 2024

@rolyon

Can you review the proposed changes?

Important: When the changes are ready for publication, adding a #sign-off comment is the best way to signal that the PR is ready for the review team to merge.

#label:"aq-pr-triaged"
@MicrosoftDocs/public-repo-pr-review-team

@prmerger-automator prmerger-automator bot added the aq-pr-triaged tracking label for the PR review team label Nov 25, 2024
@PMEds28
Copy link
Contributor

PMEds28 commented Jan 20, 2025

@rolyon

Can you review this old PR and determine whether it needs to be closed or merged?

@MicrosoftDocs/public-repo-pr-review-team

@v-ccolin
Copy link
Contributor

v-ccolin commented Mar 9, 2025

I sent an email to the content owner today.

@MicrosoftDocs/public-repo-pr-review-team

@ttorble
Copy link
Contributor

ttorble commented Apr 13, 2025

I sent a Teams message to the content owner today.

@MicrosoftDocs/public-repo-pr-review-team

@v-ccolin
Copy link
Contributor

v-ccolin commented May 1, 2025

I sent an email to the content owner today.

@MicrosoftDocs/public-repo-pr-review-team

@rolyon
Copy link
Contributor

rolyon commented May 18, 2025

Hi @ThomVanL
Thanks for your contribution to the docs. We'll work on getting your updates merged.
thanks

@rolyon
Copy link
Contributor

rolyon commented May 18, 2025

#sign-off

@Court72 Court72 merged commit 1e22486 into MicrosoftDocs:main May 19, 2025
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@rolyon rolyon Awaiting requested review from rolyon

Assignees

@rolyon rolyon

Labels

aq-pr-triaged tracking label for the PR review team Change sent to author qualifies-for-auto-merge ready-to-merge resource-graph/svc

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants

@ThomVanL @Court72 @PMEds28 @v-ccolin @ttorble @rolyon