Christian Weiss
My feedback
-
163 votes
Work on this feature is now started. Will update when this is released.
Thanks.
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
47 votes5 comments · Azure Active Directory » Role-based Access Control · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
Hi,
We support service principals to be added to security groups. Here’s the documentation – https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/active-directory/fundamentals/active-directory-groups-create-azure-portal#group-typesChristian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
73 votes4 comments · Azure Monitor-Application Insights » Continuous Export · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
Thank you for the feedback , our team will review it and consider this feature for future implementations of data export scenarios.
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
75 votes
Save queries and shared saved queries support in ARM template is now planned.
This should enable programmatic update of saved queries.Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
68 votes
This is on our plan. Thanks for your feedback !
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
584 votes
Please tell us a bit more about scenarios you are trying to enable and how do you see this feature working.
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
550 votesChristian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
395 votesChristian Weiss
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment -
2,495 votesChristian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
119 votes
Still unplanned, but please keep the votes coming!
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
318 votes
We have started the planning for this feature and hope to have a preview by the end of the calendar year. In the meantime, could you respond to aadb2cpreview@microsoft.com with the answers to the following questions:
- In which scenarios do you plan to force the user to change his/her password?
- What kind of information (if any) would you like to get back if the user goes through the reset flow?
- Do you currently or plan to track which users have reset their password?Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
256 votes
Thank you. We will examine the experience of duplicate sign ups across Identity providers. Would performing this check by using the email address be sufficient?
BTW, Linking multiple provider accounts to one user is in our roadmap and we’ve already achieved it in preview…
We look forward to your feedback
/Jose Rojas
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
47 votes
Thanks for the feedback. We will take this under review, and report back.
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
5,093 votes
DNSSEC remains on our long term roadmap, however it is unlikely to be available in CY 2019. If DNSSEC is a critical and immediate requirement for your business we’d suggest that you consider evaluating 3rd party DNS hosting solutions that provide this feature.
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
1,322 votes233 comments · Azure Active Directory » End user experiences · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →
Folks,
Thanks for the questions and suggestions. And apologies for not sharing any update on this thread for so long. We’ve been working on this problem and have announced changes on our official team blog (see here: https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/enterprisemobility/2016/09/15/cleaning-up-the-azure-ad-and-microsoft-account-overlap/).
First, we are acutely aware of the UX pain this is causing and we are sorry for this. We are trying to undo a decade and a half of systems divergence. There are literally hundreds of different engineering teams across Microsoft involved in this effort. So this is taking time.
Second, we can’t easily “merge” two accounts, or allow IT to “take over” personal Microsoft accounts. There are two main hurdles: (1) The terms of service are fundamentally different for the two account types and (2) they are based on different technologies with different stacks (different identifiers, SDKs, token formats, etc.). We’re working to converge the two stacks but again this…
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
81 votesplanned · 8 comments · Azure Synapse Analytics » SQL/Loading · Flag idea as inappropriate… · Admin →Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
38 votes
Sorry for the confusion, there was a regression during deployment in the Large Object support that caused a rollback of the functionality. We are actively working on getting a fix.
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
509 votes
Thank you for your feedback. I have discussed this in more detail with our team.
You are correct the workaround suggested to use .AsEnumerable().FirstOrDefault(). should not be a recommended work around. This way results in materializing all documents on the client first before getting the 1st document, which is not very efficient and the exact opposite of what you are trying to achieve.
Instead we recommend you use Take(1).AsEnumerable() and then .First() or .Single() or .FirstOrDefault() for Single() and First(). Take(1) is translated to SELECT TOP 1 and is processed server-side so more efficient than the previous suggestion and is what you are trying to achieve.
As to the original ask. The support for these operations can be done, but this work is not prioritized against the other work we want to deliver. I will move this back as unplanned but please note this is on our roadmap.
Thanks again…
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
491 votes
This support is planned for SQL DB Managed Instances:
Thanks
Christian Weiss
supported this idea
·
-
29 votesChristian Weiss
supported this idea
·
VNET integration should really be included in ALL plans - even Basic. We will not use API management until that's changed.