Stay Ahead, Stay ONMINE

No More Tableau Downtime: Metadata API for Proactive Data Health

In today’s world, the reliability of data solutions is everything. When we build dashboards and reports, one expects that the numbers reflected there are correct and up-to-date. Based on these numbers, insights are drawn and actions are taken. For any unforeseen reason, if the dashboards are broken or if the numbers are incorrect — then it becomes a fire-fight to fix everything. If the issues are not fixed in time, then it damages the trust placed on the data team and their solutions.  But why would dashboards be broken or have wrong numbers? If the dashboard was built correctly the first time, then 99% of the time the issue comes from the data that feeds the dashboards — from the data warehouse. Some possible scenarios are: Few ETL pipelines failed, so the new data is not yet in A table is replaced with another new one  Some columns in the table are dropped or renamed Schemas in data warehouse have changed And many more. There is still a chance that the issue is on the Tableau site, but in my experience, most of the times, it is always due to some changes in data warehouse. Even though we know the root cause, it’s not always straightforward to start working on a fix. There is no central place where you can check which Tableau data sources rely on specific tables. If you have the Tableau Data Management add-on, it could help, but from what I know, its hard to find dependencies of custom sql queries used in data sources. Nevertheless, the add-on is too expensive and most companies don’t have it. The real pain begins when you have to go through all the data sources manually to start fixing it. On top of it, you have a string of users on your head impatiently waiting for a quick-fix. The fix itself might not be difficult, it would just be a time-consuming one. What if we could anticipate these issues and identify impacted data sources before anyone notices a problem? Wouldn’t that just be great? Well, there is a way now with the Tableau Metadata API. The Metadata API uses GraphQL, a query language for APIs that returns only the data that you’re interested in. For more info on what’s possible with GraphQL, do check out GraphQL.org. In this blog post, I’ll show you how to connect to the Tableau Metadata API using Python’s Tableau Server Client (TSC) library to proactively identify data sources using specific tables, so that you can act fast before any issues arise. Once you know which Tableau data sources are affected by a specific table, you can make some updates yourself or alert the owners of those data sources about the upcoming changes so they can be prepared for it. Connecting to the Tableau Metadata API Lets connect to the Tableau Server using TSC. We need to import in all the libraries we would need for the exercise! ### Import all required libraries import tableauserverclient as t import pandas as pd import json import ast import re In order to connect to the Metadata API, you will have to first create a personal access token in your Tableau Account settings. Then update the & with the token you just created. Also update with your Tableau site. If the connection is established successfully, then “Connected” will be printed in the output window. ### Connect to Tableau server using personal access token tableau_auth = t.PersonalAccessTokenAuth(“”, “”, site_id=””) server = t.Server(“https://dub01.online.tableau.com/”, use_server_version=True) with server.auth.sign_in(tableau_auth): print(“Connected”) Lets now get a list of all data sources that are published on your site. There are many attributes you can fetch, but for the current use case, lets keep it simple and only get the id, name and owner contact information for every data source. This will be our master list to which we will add in all other information. ############### Get all the list of data sources on your Site all_datasources_query = “”” { publishedDatasources { name id owner { name email } } }””” with server.auth.sign_in(tableau_auth): result = server.metadata.query( all_datasources_query ) Since I want this blog to be focussed on how to proactively identify which data sources are affected by a specific table, I’ll not be going into the nuances of Metadata API. To better understand how the query works, you can refer to a very detailed Tableau’s own Metadata API documentation. One thing to note is that the Metadata API returns data in a JSON format. Depending on what you are querying, you’ll end up with multiple nested json lists and it can get very tricky to convert this into a pandas dataframe. For the above metadata query, you will end up with a result which would like below (this is mock data just to give you an idea of what the output looks like): { “data”: { “publishedDatasources”: [ { “name”: “Sales Performance DataSource”, “id”: “f3b1a2c4-1234-5678-9abc-1234567890ab”, “owner”: { “name”: “Alice Johnson”, “email”: “[email protected]” } }, { “name”: “Customer Orders DataSource”, “id”: “a4d2b3c5-2345-6789-abcd-2345678901bc”, “owner”: { “name”: “Bob Smith”, “email”: “[email protected]” } }, { “name”: “Product Returns and Profitability”, “id”: “c5e3d4f6-3456-789a-bcde-3456789012cd”, “owner”: { “name”: “Alice Johnson”, “email”: “[email protected]” } }, { “name”: “Customer Segmentation Analysis”, “id”: “d6f4e5a7-4567-89ab-cdef-4567890123de”, “owner”: { “name”: “Charlie Lee”, “email”: “[email protected]” } }, { “name”: “Regional Sales Trends (Custom SQL)”, “id”: “e7a5f6b8-5678-9abc-def0-5678901234ef”, “owner”: { “name”: “Bob Smith”, “email”: “[email protected]” } } ] } } We need to convert this JSON response into a dataframe so that its easy to work with. Notice that we need to extract the name and email of the owner from inside the owner object.  ### We need to convert the response into dataframe for easy data manipulation col_names = result[‘data’][‘publishedDatasources’][0].keys() master_df = pd.DataFrame(columns=col_names) for i in result[‘data’][‘publishedDatasources’]: tmp_dt = {k:v for k,v in i.items()} master_df = pd.concat([master_df, pd.DataFrame.from_dict(tmp_dt, orient=’index’).T]) # Extract the owner name and email from the owner object master_df[‘owner_name’] = master_df[‘owner’].apply(lambda x: x.get(‘name’) if isinstance(x, dict) else None) master_df[‘owner_email’] = master_df[‘owner’].apply(lambda x: x.get(’email’) if isinstance(x, dict) else None) master_df.reset_index(inplace=True) master_df.drop([‘index’,’owner’], axis=1, inplace=True) print(‘There are ‘, master_df.shape[0] , ‘ datasources in your site’) This is how the structure of master_df would look like: Sample output of code Once we have the main list ready, we can go ahead and start getting the names of the tables embedded in the data sources. If you are an avid Tableau user, you know that there are two ways to selecting tables in a Tableau data source — one is to directly choose the tables and establish a relation between them and the other is to use a custom sql query with one or more tables to achieve a new resultant table. Therefore, we need to address both the cases. Processing of Custom SQL query tables Below is the query to get the list of all custom SQLs used in the site along with their data sources. Notice that I have filtered the list to get only first 500 custom sql queries. In case there are more in your org, you will have to use an offset to get the next set of custom sql queries. There is also an option of using cursor method in Pagination when you want to fetch large list of results (refer here). For the sake of simplicity, I just use the offset method as I know, as there are less than 500 custom sql queries used on the site. # Get the data sources and the table names from all the custom sql queries used on your Site custom_table_query = “”” { customSQLTablesConnection(first: 500){ nodes { id name downstreamDatasources { name } query } } } “”” with server.auth.sign_in(tableau_auth): custom_table_query_result = server.metadata.query( custom_table_query ) Based on our mock data, this is how our output would look like: { “data”: { “customSQLTablesConnection”: { “nodes”: [ { “id”: “csql-1234”, “name”: “RegionalSales_CustomSQL”, “downstreamDatasources”: [ { “name”: “Regional Sales Trends (Custom SQL)” } ], “query”: “SELECT r.region_name, SUM(s.sales_amount) AS total_sales FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Sales s JOIN ecommerce.sales_data.Regions r ON s.region_id = r.region_id GROUP BY r.region_name” }, { “id”: “csql-5678”, “name”: “ProfitabilityAnalysis_CustomSQL”, “downstreamDatasources”: [ { “name”: “Product Returns and Profitability” } ], “query”: “SELECT p.product_category, SUM(s.profit) AS total_profit FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Sales s JOIN ecommerce.sales_data.Products p ON s.product_id = p.product_id GROUP BY p.product_category” }, { “id”: “csql-9101”, “name”: “CustomerSegmentation_CustomSQL”, “downstreamDatasources”: [ { “name”: “Customer Segmentation Analysis” } ], “query”: “SELECT c.customer_id, c.location, COUNT(o.order_id) AS total_orders FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Customers c JOIN ecommerce.sales_data.Orders o ON c.customer_id = o.customer_id GROUP BY c.customer_id, c.location” }, { “id”: “csql-3141”, “name”: “CustomerOrders_CustomSQL”, “downstreamDatasources”: [ { “name”: “Customer Orders DataSource” } ], “query”: “SELECT o.order_id, o.customer_id, o.order_date, o.sales_amount FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Orders o WHERE o.order_status = ‘Completed'” }, { “id”: “csql-3142”, “name”: “CustomerProfiles_CustomSQL”, “downstreamDatasources”: [ { “name”: “Customer Orders DataSource” } ], “query”: “SELECT c.customer_id, c.customer_name, c.segment, c.location FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Customers c WHERE c.active_flag = 1” }, { “id”: “csql-3143”, “name”: “CustomerReturns_CustomSQL”, “downstreamDatasources”: [ { “name”: “Customer Orders DataSource” } ], “query”: “SELECT r.return_id, r.order_id, r.return_reason FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Returns r” } ] } } } Just like before when we were creating the master list of data sources, here also we have nested json for the downstream data sources where we would need to extract only the “name” part of it. In the “query” column, the entire custom sql is dumped. If we use regex pattern, we can easily search for the names of the table used in the query. We know that the table names always come after FROM or a JOIN clause and they generally follow the format … The is optional and most of the times not used. There were some queries I found which used this format and I ended up only getting the database and schema names, and not the complete table name. Once we have extracted the names of the data sources and the names of the tables, we need to merge the rows per data source as there can be multiple custom sql queries used in a single data source. ### Convert the custom sql response into dataframe col_names = custom_table_query_result[‘data’][‘customSQLTablesConnection’][‘nodes’][0].keys() cs_df = pd.DataFrame(columns=col_names) for i in custom_table_query_result[‘data’][‘customSQLTablesConnection’][‘nodes’]: tmp_dt = {k:v for k,v in i.items()} cs_df = pd.concat([cs_df, pd.DataFrame.from_dict(tmp_dt, orient=’index’).T]) # Extract the data source name where the custom sql query was used cs_df[‘data_source’] = cs_df.downstreamDatasources.apply(lambda x: x[0][‘name’] if x and ‘name’ in x[0] else None) cs_df.reset_index(inplace=True) cs_df.drop([‘index’,’downstreamDatasources’], axis=1,inplace=True) ### We need to extract the table names from the sql query. We know the table name comes after FROM or JOIN clause # Note that the name of table can be of the format .. # Depending on the format of how table is called, you will have to modify the regex expression def extract_tables(sql): # Regex to match database.schema.table or schema.table, avoid alias pattern = r'(?:FROM|JOIN)s+((?:[w+]|w+).(?:[w+]|w+)(?:.(?:[w+]|w+))?)b’ matches = re.findall(pattern, sql, re.IGNORECASE) return list(set(matches)) # Unique table names cs_df[‘customSQLTables’] = cs_df[‘query’].apply(extract_tables) cs_df = cs_df[[‘data_source’,’customSQLTables’]] # We need to merge datasources as there can be multiple custom sqls used in the same data source cs_df = cs_df.groupby(‘data_source’, as_index=False).agg({ ‘customSQLTables’: lambda x: list(set(item for sublist in x for item in sublist)) # Flatten & make unique }) print(‘There are ‘, cs_df.shape[0], ‘datasources with custom sqls used in it’) After we perform all the above operations, this is how the structure of cs_df would look like: Sample output of code Processing of regular Tables in Data Sources Now we need to get the list of all the regular tables used in a datasource which are not a part of custom SQL. There are two ways to go about it. Either use the publishedDatasources object and check for upstreamTables or use DatabaseTable and check for upstreamDatasources. I’ll go by the first method because I want the results at a data source level (basically, I want some code ready to reuse when I want to check a specific data source in further detail). Here again, for the sake of simplicity, instead of going for pagination, I’m looping through each datasource to ensure I have everything. We get the upstreamTables inside of the field object so that has to be cleaned out. ############### Get the data sources with the regular table names used in your site ### Its best to extract the tables information for every data source and then merge the results. # Since we only get the table information nested under fields, in case there are hundreds of fields # used in a single data source, we will hit the response limits and will not be able to retrieve all the data. data_source_list = master_df.name.tolist() col_names = [‘name’, ‘id’, ‘extractLastUpdateTime’, ‘fields’] ds_df = pd.DataFrame(columns=col_names) with server.auth.sign_in(tableau_auth): for ds_name in data_source_list: query = “”” { publishedDatasources (filter: { name: “”””+ ds_name + “””” }) { name id extractLastUpdateTime fields { name upstreamTables { name } } } } “”” ds_name_result = server.metadata.query( query ) for i in ds_name_result[‘data’][‘publishedDatasources’]: tmp_dt = {k:v for k,v in i.items() if k != ‘fields’} tmp_dt[‘fields’] = json.dumps(i[‘fields’]) ds_df = pd.concat([ds_df, pd.DataFrame.from_dict(tmp_dt, orient=’index’).T]) ds_df.reset_index(inplace=True) This is how the structure of ds_df would look: Sample output of code We can need to flatten out the fields object and extract the field names as well as the table names. Since the table names will be repeating multiple times, we would have to deduplicate to keep only the unique ones. # Function to extract the values of fields and upstream tables in json lists def extract_values(json_list, key): values = [] for item in json_list: values.append(item[key]) return values ds_df[“fields”] = ds_df[“fields”].apply(ast.literal_eval) ds_df[‘field_names’] = ds_df.apply(lambda x: extract_values(x[‘fields’],’name’), axis=1) ds_df[‘upstreamTables’] = ds_df.apply(lambda x: extract_values(x[‘fields’],’upstreamTables’), axis=1) # Function to extract the unique table names def extract_upstreamTable_values(table_list): values = set()a for inner_list in table_list: for item in inner_list: if ‘name’ in item: values.add(item[‘name’]) return list(values) ds_df[‘upstreamTables’] = ds_df.apply(lambda x: extract_upstreamTable_values(x[‘upstreamTables’]), axis=1) ds_df.drop([“index”,”fields”], axis=1, inplace=True) Once we do the above operations, the final structure of ds_df would look something like this: Sample output of code We have all the pieces and now we just have to merge them together: ###### Join all the data together master_data = pd.merge(master_df, ds_df, how=”left”, on=[“name”,”id”]) master_data = pd.merge(master_data, cs_df, how=”left”, left_on=”name”, right_on=”data_source”) # Save the results to analyse further master_data.to_excel(“Tableau Data Sources with Tables.xlsx”, index=False) This is our final master_data: Sample Output of code Table-level Impact Analysis Let’s say there were some schema changes on the “Sales” table and you want to know which data sources will be impacted. Then you can simply write a small function which checks if a table is present in either of the two columns — upstreamTables or customSQLTables like below. def filter_rows_with_table(df, col1, col2, target_table): “”” Filters rows in df where target_table is part of any value in either col1 or col2 (supports partial match). Returns full rows (all columns retained). “”” return df[ df.apply( lambda row: (isinstance(row[col1], list) and any(target_table in item for item in row[col1])) or (isinstance(row[col2], list) and any(target_table in item for item in row[col2])), axis=1 ) ] # As an example filter_rows_with_table(master_data, ‘upstreamTables’, ‘customSQLTables’, ‘Sales’) Below is the output. You can see that 3 data sources will be impacted by this change. You can also alert the data source owners Alice and Bob in advance about this so they can start working on a fix before something breaks on the Tableau dashboards. Sample output of code You can check out the complete version of the code in my Github repository here. This is just one of the potential use-cases of the Tableau Metadata API. You can also extract the field names used in custom sql queries and add to the dataset to get a field-level impact analysis. One can also monitor the stale data sources with the extractLastUpdateTime to see if those have any issues or need to be archived if they are not used any more. We can also use the dashboards object to fetch information at a dashboard level. Final Thoughts If you have come this far, kudos. This is just one use case of automating Tableau data management. It’s time to reflect on your own work and think which of those other tasks you could automate to make your life easier. I hope this mini-project served as an enjoyable learning experience to understand the power of Tableau Metadata API. If you liked reading this, you might also like another one of my blog posts about Tableau, on some of the challenges I faced when dealing with big . Also do check out my previous blog where I explored building an interactive, database-powered app with Python, Streamlit, and SQLite. Before you go… Follow me so you don’t miss any new posts I write in future; you will find more of my articles on my . You can also connect with me on LinkedIn or Twitter!

In today’s world, the reliability of data solutions is everything. When we build dashboards and reports, one expects that the numbers reflected there are correct and up-to-date. Based on these numbers, insights are drawn and actions are taken. For any unforeseen reason, if the dashboards are broken or if the numbers are incorrect — then it becomes a fire-fight to fix everything. If the issues are not fixed in time, then it damages the trust placed on the data team and their solutions. 

But why would dashboards be broken or have wrong numbers? If the dashboard was built correctly the first time, then 99% of the time the issue comes from the data that feeds the dashboards — from the data warehouse. Some possible scenarios are:

  • Few ETL pipelines failed, so the new data is not yet in
  • A table is replaced with another new one 
  • Some columns in the table are dropped or renamed
  • Schemas in data warehouse have changed
  • And many more.

There is still a chance that the issue is on the Tableau site, but in my experience, most of the times, it is always due to some changes in data warehouse. Even though we know the root cause, it’s not always straightforward to start working on a fix. There is no central place where you can check which Tableau data sources rely on specific tables. If you have the Tableau Data Management add-on, it could help, but from what I know, its hard to find dependencies of custom sql queries used in data sources.

Nevertheless, the add-on is too expensive and most companies don’t have it. The real pain begins when you have to go through all the data sources manually to start fixing it. On top of it, you have a string of users on your head impatiently waiting for a quick-fix. The fix itself might not be difficult, it would just be a time-consuming one.

What if we could anticipate these issues and identify impacted data sources before anyone notices a problem? Wouldn’t that just be great? Well, there is a way now with the Tableau Metadata API. The Metadata API uses GraphQL, a query language for APIs that returns only the data that you’re interested in. For more info on what’s possible with GraphQL, do check out GraphQL.org.

In this blog post, I’ll show you how to connect to the Tableau Metadata API using Python’s Tableau Server Client (TSC) library to proactively identify data sources using specific tables, so that you can act fast before any issues arise. Once you know which Tableau data sources are affected by a specific table, you can make some updates yourself or alert the owners of those data sources about the upcoming changes so they can be prepared for it.

Connecting to the Tableau Metadata API

Lets connect to the Tableau Server using TSC. We need to import in all the libraries we would need for the exercise!

### Import all required libraries
import tableauserverclient as t
import pandas as pd
import json
import ast
import re

In order to connect to the Metadata API, you will have to first create a personal access token in your Tableau Account settings. Then update the & with the token you just created. Also update with your Tableau site. If the connection is established successfully, then “Connected” will be printed in the output window.

### Connect to Tableau server using personal access token
tableau_auth = t.PersonalAccessTokenAuth("", "", 
                                           site_id="")
server = t.Server("https://dub01.online.tableau.com/", use_server_version=True)

with server.auth.sign_in(tableau_auth):
        print("Connected")

Lets now get a list of all data sources that are published on your site. There are many attributes you can fetch, but for the current use case, lets keep it simple and only get the id, name and owner contact information for every data source. This will be our master list to which we will add in all other information.

############### Get all the list of data sources on your Site

all_datasources_query = """ {
  publishedDatasources {
    name
    id
    owner {
    name
    email
    }
  }
}"""
with server.auth.sign_in(tableau_auth):
    result = server.metadata.query(
        all_datasources_query
    )

Since I want this blog to be focussed on how to proactively identify which data sources are affected by a specific table, I’ll not be going into the nuances of Metadata API. To better understand how the query works, you can refer to a very detailed Tableau’s own Metadata API documentation.

One thing to note is that the Metadata API returns data in a JSON format. Depending on what you are querying, you’ll end up with multiple nested json lists and it can get very tricky to convert this into a pandas dataframe. For the above metadata query, you will end up with a result which would like below (this is mock data just to give you an idea of what the output looks like):

{
  "data": {
    "publishedDatasources": [
      {
        "name": "Sales Performance DataSource",
        "id": "f3b1a2c4-1234-5678-9abc-1234567890ab",
        "owner": {
          "name": "Alice Johnson",
          "email": "[email protected]"
        }
      },
      {
        "name": "Customer Orders DataSource",
        "id": "a4d2b3c5-2345-6789-abcd-2345678901bc",
        "owner": {
          "name": "Bob Smith",
          "email": "[email protected]"
        }
      },
      {
        "name": "Product Returns and Profitability",
        "id": "c5e3d4f6-3456-789a-bcde-3456789012cd",
        "owner": {
          "name": "Alice Johnson",
          "email": "[email protected]"
        }
      },
      {
        "name": "Customer Segmentation Analysis",
        "id": "d6f4e5a7-4567-89ab-cdef-4567890123de",
        "owner": {
          "name": "Charlie Lee",
          "email": "[email protected]"
        }
      },
      {
        "name": "Regional Sales Trends (Custom SQL)",
        "id": "e7a5f6b8-5678-9abc-def0-5678901234ef",
        "owner": {
          "name": "Bob Smith",
          "email": "[email protected]"
        }
      }
    ]
  }
}

We need to convert this JSON response into a dataframe so that its easy to work with. Notice that we need to extract the name and email of the owner from inside the owner object. 

### We need to convert the response into dataframe for easy data manipulation

col_names = result['data']['publishedDatasources'][0].keys()
master_df = pd.DataFrame(columns=col_names)

for i in result['data']['publishedDatasources']:
    tmp_dt = {k:v for k,v in i.items()}
    master_df = pd.concat([master_df, pd.DataFrame.from_dict(tmp_dt, orient='index').T])

# Extract the owner name and email from the owner object
master_df['owner_name'] = master_df['owner'].apply(lambda x: x.get('name') if isinstance(x, dict) else None)
master_df['owner_email'] = master_df['owner'].apply(lambda x: x.get('email') if isinstance(x, dict) else None)

master_df.reset_index(inplace=True)
master_df.drop(['index','owner'], axis=1, inplace=True)
print('There are ', master_df.shape[0] , ' datasources in your site')

This is how the structure of master_df would look like:

Sample output of code

Once we have the main list ready, we can go ahead and start getting the names of the tables embedded in the data sources. If you are an avid Tableau user, you know that there are two ways to selecting tables in a Tableau data source — one is to directly choose the tables and establish a relation between them and the other is to use a custom sql query with one or more tables to achieve a new resultant table. Therefore, we need to address both the cases.

Processing of Custom SQL query tables

Below is the query to get the list of all custom SQLs used in the site along with their data sources. Notice that I have filtered the list to get only first 500 custom sql queries. In case there are more in your org, you will have to use an offset to get the next set of custom sql queries. There is also an option of using cursor method in Pagination when you want to fetch large list of results (refer here). For the sake of simplicity, I just use the offset method as I know, as there are less than 500 custom sql queries used on the site.

# Get the data sources and the table names from all the custom sql queries used on your Site

custom_table_query = """  {
  customSQLTablesConnection(first: 500){
    nodes {
        id
        name
        downstreamDatasources {
        name
        }
        query
    }
  }
}
"""

with server.auth.sign_in(tableau_auth):
    custom_table_query_result = server.metadata.query(
        custom_table_query
    )

Based on our mock data, this is how our output would look like:

{
  "data": {
    "customSQLTablesConnection": {
      "nodes": [
        {
          "id": "csql-1234",
          "name": "RegionalSales_CustomSQL",
          "downstreamDatasources": [
            {
              "name": "Regional Sales Trends (Custom SQL)"
            }
          ],
          "query": "SELECT r.region_name, SUM(s.sales_amount) AS total_sales FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Sales s JOIN ecommerce.sales_data.Regions r ON s.region_id = r.region_id GROUP BY r.region_name"
        },
        {
          "id": "csql-5678",
          "name": "ProfitabilityAnalysis_CustomSQL",
          "downstreamDatasources": [
            {
              "name": "Product Returns and Profitability"
            }
          ],
          "query": "SELECT p.product_category, SUM(s.profit) AS total_profit FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Sales s JOIN ecommerce.sales_data.Products p ON s.product_id = p.product_id GROUP BY p.product_category"
        },
        {
          "id": "csql-9101",
          "name": "CustomerSegmentation_CustomSQL",
          "downstreamDatasources": [
            {
              "name": "Customer Segmentation Analysis"
            }
          ],
          "query": "SELECT c.customer_id, c.location, COUNT(o.order_id) AS total_orders FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Customers c JOIN ecommerce.sales_data.Orders o ON c.customer_id = o.customer_id GROUP BY c.customer_id, c.location"
        },
        {
          "id": "csql-3141",
          "name": "CustomerOrders_CustomSQL",
          "downstreamDatasources": [
            {
              "name": "Customer Orders DataSource"
            }
          ],
          "query": "SELECT o.order_id, o.customer_id, o.order_date, o.sales_amount FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Orders o WHERE o.order_status = 'Completed'"
        },
        {
          "id": "csql-3142",
          "name": "CustomerProfiles_CustomSQL",
          "downstreamDatasources": [
            {
              "name": "Customer Orders DataSource"
            }
          ],
          "query": "SELECT c.customer_id, c.customer_name, c.segment, c.location FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Customers c WHERE c.active_flag = 1"
        },
        {
          "id": "csql-3143",
          "name": "CustomerReturns_CustomSQL",
          "downstreamDatasources": [
            {
              "name": "Customer Orders DataSource"
            }
          ],
          "query": "SELECT r.return_id, r.order_id, r.return_reason FROM ecommerce.sales_data.Returns r"
        }
      ]
    }
  }
}

Just like before when we were creating the master list of data sources, here also we have nested json for the downstream data sources where we would need to extract only the “name” part of it. In the “query” column, the entire custom sql is dumped. If we use regex pattern, we can easily search for the names of the table used in the query.

We know that the table names always come after FROM or a JOIN clause and they generally follow the format ..

. The is optional and most of the times not used. There were some queries I found which used this format and I ended up only getting the database and schema names, and not the complete table name. Once we have extracted the names of the data sources and the names of the tables, we need to merge the rows per data source as there can be multiple custom sql queries used in a single data source.

### Convert the custom sql response into dataframe
col_names = custom_table_query_result['data']['customSQLTablesConnection']['nodes'][0].keys()
cs_df = pd.DataFrame(columns=col_names)

for i in custom_table_query_result['data']['customSQLTablesConnection']['nodes']:
    tmp_dt = {k:v for k,v in i.items()}

    cs_df = pd.concat([cs_df, pd.DataFrame.from_dict(tmp_dt, orient='index').T])

# Extract the data source name where the custom sql query was used
cs_df['data_source'] = cs_df.downstreamDatasources.apply(lambda x: x[0]['name'] if x and 'name' in x[0] else None)
cs_df.reset_index(inplace=True)
cs_df.drop(['index','downstreamDatasources'], axis=1,inplace=True)

### We need to extract the table names from the sql query. We know the table name comes after FROM or JOIN clause
# Note that the name of table can be of the format ..
# Depending on the format of how table is called, you will have to modify the regex expression

def extract_tables(sql):
    # Regex to match database.schema.table or schema.table, avoid alias
    pattern = r'(?:FROM|JOIN)s+((?:[w+]|w+).(?:[w+]|w+)(?:.(?:[w+]|w+))?)b'
    matches = re.findall(pattern, sql, re.IGNORECASE)
    return list(set(matches))  # Unique table names

cs_df['customSQLTables'] = cs_df['query'].apply(extract_tables)
cs_df = cs_df[['data_source','customSQLTables']]

# We need to merge datasources as there can be multiple custom sqls used in the same data source
cs_df = cs_df.groupby('data_source', as_index=False).agg({
    'customSQLTables': lambda x: list(set(item for sublist in x for item in sublist))  # Flatten & make unique
})

print('There are ', cs_df.shape[0], 'datasources with custom sqls used in it')

After we perform all the above operations, this is how the structure of cs_df would look like:

Sample output of code

Processing of regular Tables in Data Sources

Now we need to get the list of all the regular tables used in a datasource which are not a part of custom SQL. There are two ways to go about it. Either use the publishedDatasources object and check for upstreamTables or use DatabaseTable and check for upstreamDatasources. I’ll go by the first method because I want the results at a data source level (basically, I want some code ready to reuse when I want to check a specific data source in further detail). Here again, for the sake of simplicity, instead of going for pagination, I’m looping through each datasource to ensure I have everything. We get the upstreamTables inside of the field object so that has to be cleaned out.

############### Get the data sources with the regular table names used in your site

### Its best to extract the tables information for every data source and then merge the results.
# Since we only get the table information nested under fields, in case there are hundreds of fields 
# used in a single data source, we will hit the response limits and will not be able to retrieve all the data.

data_source_list = master_df.name.tolist()

col_names = ['name', 'id', 'extractLastUpdateTime', 'fields']
ds_df = pd.DataFrame(columns=col_names)

with server.auth.sign_in(tableau_auth):
    for ds_name in data_source_list:
        query = """ {
            publishedDatasources (filter: { name: """"+ ds_name + """" }) {
            name
            id
            extractLastUpdateTime
            fields {
                name
                upstreamTables {
                    name
                }
            }
            }
        } """
        ds_name_result = server.metadata.query(
        query
        )
        for i in ds_name_result['data']['publishedDatasources']:
            tmp_dt = {k:v for k,v in i.items() if k != 'fields'}
            tmp_dt['fields'] = json.dumps(i['fields'])
        ds_df = pd.concat([ds_df, pd.DataFrame.from_dict(tmp_dt, orient='index').T])

ds_df.reset_index(inplace=True)

This is how the structure of ds_df would look:

Sample output of code

We can need to flatten out the fields object and extract the field names as well as the table names. Since the table names will be repeating multiple times, we would have to deduplicate to keep only the unique ones.

# Function to extract the values of fields and upstream tables in json lists
def extract_values(json_list, key):
    values = []
    for item in json_list:
        values.append(item[key])
    return values

ds_df["fields"] = ds_df["fields"].apply(ast.literal_eval)
ds_df['field_names'] = ds_df.apply(lambda x: extract_values(x['fields'],'name'), axis=1)
ds_df['upstreamTables'] = ds_df.apply(lambda x: extract_values(x['fields'],'upstreamTables'), axis=1)

# Function to extract the unique table names 
def extract_upstreamTable_values(table_list):
    values = set()a
    for inner_list in table_list:
        for item in inner_list:
            if 'name' in item:
                values.add(item['name'])
    return list(values)

ds_df['upstreamTables'] = ds_df.apply(lambda x: extract_upstreamTable_values(x['upstreamTables']), axis=1)
ds_df.drop(["index","fields"], axis=1, inplace=True)

Once we do the above operations, the final structure of ds_df would look something like this:

Sample output of code

We have all the pieces and now we just have to merge them together:

###### Join all the data together
master_data = pd.merge(master_df, ds_df, how="left", on=["name","id"])
master_data = pd.merge(master_data, cs_df, how="left", left_on="name", right_on="data_source")

# Save the results to analyse further
master_data.to_excel("Tableau Data Sources with Tables.xlsx", index=False)

This is our final master_data:

Sample Output of code

Table-level Impact Analysis

Let’s say there were some schema changes on the “Sales” table and you want to know which data sources will be impacted. Then you can simply write a small function which checks if a table is present in either of the two columns — upstreamTables or customSQLTables like below.

def filter_rows_with_table(df, col1, col2, target_table):
    """
    Filters rows in df where target_table is part of any value in either col1 or col2 (supports partial match).
    Returns full rows (all columns retained).
    """
    return df[
        df.apply(
            lambda row: 
                (isinstance(row[col1], list) and any(target_table in item for item in row[col1])) or
                (isinstance(row[col2], list) and any(target_table in item for item in row[col2])),
            axis=1
        )
    ]
# As an example 
filter_rows_with_table(master_data, 'upstreamTables', 'customSQLTables', 'Sales')

Below is the output. You can see that 3 data sources will be impacted by this change. You can also alert the data source owners Alice and Bob in advance about this so they can start working on a fix before something breaks on the Tableau dashboards.

Sample output of code

You can check out the complete version of the code in my Github repository here.

This is just one of the potential use-cases of the Tableau Metadata API. You can also extract the field names used in custom sql queries and add to the dataset to get a field-level impact analysis. One can also monitor the stale data sources with the extractLastUpdateTime to see if those have any issues or need to be archived if they are not used any more. We can also use the dashboards object to fetch information at a dashboard level.

Final Thoughts

If you have come this far, kudos. This is just one use case of automating Tableau data management. It’s time to reflect on your own work and think which of those other tasks you could automate to make your life easier. I hope this mini-project served as an enjoyable learning experience to understand the power of Tableau Metadata API. If you liked reading this, you might also like another one of my blog posts about Tableau, on some of the challenges I faced when dealing with big .

Also do check out my previous blog where I explored building an interactive, database-powered app with Python, Streamlit, and SQLite.


Before you go…

Follow me so you don’t miss any new posts I write in future; you will find more of my articles on my . You can also connect with me on LinkedIn or Twitter!

Shape
Shape
Stay Ahead

Explore More Insights

Stay ahead with more perspectives on cutting-edge power, infrastructure, energy,  bitcoin and AI solutions. Explore these articles to uncover strategies and insights shaping the future of industries.

Shape

Equinor lets EPC contract for Gullfaks field

@import url(‘https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Inter:[email protected]&display=swap’); a { color: var(–color-primary-main); } .ebm-page__main h1, .ebm-page__main h2, .ebm-page__main h3, .ebm-page__main h4, .ebm-page__main h5, .ebm-page__main h6 { font-family: Inter; } body { line-height: 150%; letter-spacing: 0.025em; font-family: Inter; } button, .ebm-button-wrapper { font-family: Inter; } .label-style { text-transform: uppercase; color: var(–color-grey); font-weight: 600; font-size: 0.75rem; } .caption-style { font-size: 0.75rem; opacity: .6; } #onetrust-pc-sdk [id*=btn-handler], #onetrust-pc-sdk [class*=btn-handler] { background-color: #c19a06 !important; border-color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-policy a, #onetrust-pc-sdk a, #ot-pc-content a { color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-pc-sdk .ot-active-menu { border-color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-accept-btn-handler, #onetrust-banner-sdk #onetrust-reject-all-handler, #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-pc-btn-handler.cookie-setting-link { background-color: #c19a06 !important; border-color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk .onetrust-pc-btn-handler { color: #c19a06 !important; border-color: #c19a06 !important; } Equinor Energy AS has let an engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contract to SLB to upgrade the subsea compression system for Gullfaks field in the Norwegian North Sea. Under the contract, SLB OneSubsea will deliver two next-generation compressor modules to replace the units originally supplied in 2015 as part of the world’s first multiphase subsea compression system. The upgraded modules will increase differential pressure and flow capacity, enhancing recovery and extending field life, SLB said, while installation within the existing subsea infrastructure will minimize downtime and reduce overall campaign costs, the company continued. Gullfaks field lies in block 34/10 in the northern part of the North Sea. Three large production platforms with concrete substructures make up the development solution for the main field.

Read More »

Oxy cutting oil-and-gas capex by $300 million, eyes 1% production growth

@import url(‘https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Inter:[email protected]&display=swap’); a { color: var(–color-primary-main); } .ebm-page__main h1, .ebm-page__main h2, .ebm-page__main h3, .ebm-page__main h4, .ebm-page__main h5, .ebm-page__main h6 { font-family: Inter; } body { line-height: 150%; letter-spacing: 0.025em; font-family: Inter; } button, .ebm-button-wrapper { font-family: Inter; } .label-style { text-transform: uppercase; color: var(–color-grey); font-weight: 600; font-size: 0.75rem; } .caption-style { font-size: 0.75rem; opacity: .6; } #onetrust-pc-sdk [id*=btn-handler], #onetrust-pc-sdk [class*=btn-handler] { background-color: #c19a06 !important; border-color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-policy a, #onetrust-pc-sdk a, #ot-pc-content a { color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-pc-sdk .ot-active-menu { border-color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-accept-btn-handler, #onetrust-banner-sdk #onetrust-reject-all-handler, #onetrust-consent-sdk #onetrust-pc-btn-handler.cookie-setting-link { background-color: #c19a06 !important; border-color: #c19a06 !important; } #onetrust-consent-sdk .onetrust-pc-btn-handler { color: #c19a06 !important; border-color: #c19a06 !important; } Occidental Petroleum Corp., Houston, will spend $5.5-5.9 billion on capital projects this year, an 8% drop from 2025 and $800 million less than executives’ early forecast late last year, as the company continues to emphasize efficiency gains. Spending on oil-and-gas operations will be $300 million less than last year. Sunil Mathew, chief financial officer, late last week told investors and analysts that Occidental’s capital spending budget for 2026 (adjusted for the recently completed divestiture of OxyChem) will focus on short-cycle projects and be roughly 70% devoted to US onshore assets. Still, onshore capex will drop by $400 million from last year in part because of a drop in Permian basin activities and efficiency improvements. Other elements of Occidental’s spending plan include: A reduction of about $100 million compared to last year for exploration work A $250 million drop in spending at the company’s Low Carbon Ventures group housing Stratos Mathew said capex, which will be weighted a little to the first half, sets up Occidental’s production to average 1.45 MMboe/d for the full year, a tick up from 2025’s average of 1.434 MMboe/d but down from the roughly 1.48

Read More »

Diamondback’s Van’t Hof growing ‘more confident about the macro’

The early Barnett production will help Diamondback slightly increase its oil production this year from 2025’s average of 497,200 b/d. Van’t Hof and his team are eyeing 505,000 b/d this year with total expected production of 926,000-962,000 boe/d versus last year’s 921,000 boe/d. On a Feb. 24 conference call with analysts and investors, Van’t Hof said he’s feeling better than in recent quarters about that production number possibly moving up. The bigger picture for the oil-and-gas sector, he said, has grown a bit brighter. “Some people have been talking about [oversupplying the market] for 2 years. It just hasn’t seemed to happen as aggressively as some expected,” Van’t Hof said. “As we turn to higher demand in the summer and driving season […] people will start to find reasons to be less bearish […] In general, we just feel more confident about the macro after a couple of big shocks last year on the supply side and the demand side.” In the last 3 months of 2025, Diamondback posted a net loss of more than $1.4 billion due to a $3.6 billion impairment charge because of lower commodity prices’ effect on the company’s reserves. Adjusted EBITA fell to $2.0 billion from $2.5 billion in late 2024 and revenues during the quarter slipped to nearly $3.4 billion from $3.7 billion. Shares of Diamondback (Ticker: FANG) were essentially flat at $173.68 in early-afternoon trading on Feb. 24. Over the past 6 months, they are still up more than 20% and the company’s market value is now $50 billion.

Read More »

Vaalco Energy advances offshore drilling, development in Gabon and Ivory Coast

Vaalco Energy Inc. is drilling Etame field offshore Gabon and a preparing a field development plan (FDP) off Ivory Coast.  In Gabon, Vaalco drilled, completed, and placed Etame 15H-ST development well on production in Etame oil field in 1V block. The well has a 250 m lateral interval of net pay in high-quality Gamba sands near the top of the reservoir. The well had a stabilized flow rate of about 2,000 gross b/d of oil with a 38% water cut through a 42/64-in. choke and ESP at 54 Hz, confirming expectations from the ET-15P pilot well results. The company is working to stabilize pressure and manage the reservoir. West Etame step out exploration well spudded in mid-February. Drilling the well from the S1 slot on the Etame platform Etame West (ET-14P) exploration prospect has a 57% chance of geologic success and is expected to reach the target zone by mid-March. Etame Marin block lies in Congo basin about 32 km off the coast of Gabon. The license area is spread over five fields covering about 187 sq km. Vaalco is operator at the block with 58.8% interest. In Ivory Coast, Vaalco has been confirmed as operator (60%) of Kossipo field on the CI-40 Block southwest of Baobab field with partner PetroCI holding the remaining 40%. An FDP is expected to be completed in second-half 2026. New ocean bottom node (OBN) seismic data is expected to drive and derisk Vaalco’s updated evaluation and development plan. Estimated Gross 2C resources are 102-293 MMboe in place. The Baobab Ivorien (formerly MV10) floating production storage and offloading vessel (FPSO) is currently off the East coast of Africa and is expected to return to Ivory Coast by late March.  

Read More »

Ovintiv sets 2026 plan around Permian, Montney after declaring portfolio shift ‘complete’

2026 guidance For 2026, Ovintiv plans to invest $2.25–2.35 billion, up slightly from the $2.147 billion spent in 2025. McCracken said capital spend will be highest in first-quarter 2026 at about $625 million, “largely due to $50 million of capital allocated to the Anadarko and some drilling activity in the Montney that we inherited from NuVista.” The program is designed to deliver 205,000–212,000 b/d of oil and condensate, some 2 bcfd of natural gas, and 620,000–645,000 boe/d total company production. For full-year 2025, the company produced 614,500 boe/d.  The company is pursuing a “stay‑flat” oil strategy, maintaining liquids output through steady activity rather than aggressive volume growth.  Permian Ovintiv plans to run 5 rigs and 1-2 frac crews in the Permian basin this year, bringing 125–135 net wells online. Oil and condensate volumes are expected to average 117,000–123,000 b/d, with natural gas production of 270–295 MMcfd. The company projects 2026 drilling and completion costs below $600/ft, about $25/ft lower than 2025. Chief operating officer Gregory Givens credited faster cycle times and ongoing application of surfactant technology. Ovintiv has now deployed surfactants in about 300 Permian wells, generating a 9% uplift in oil productivity versus comparable control wells. Givens also reiterated that Ovintiv remains committed to its established cube‑development model. Responding to an analyst question, he said the company continues completing entire cubes at once, then returning “18 months later” to develop adjacent cubes—an approach that stabilizes well performance and reduces parent‑child degradation, he said. “We are getting the whole cube at the same time, and that is working quite well for us,” he said. The company plans to drill its first Barnett Woodford test well across Midland basin acreage in 2026. Ovintiv holds Barnett rights across roughly 100,000 acres and intends to move cautiously given the zone’s depth, higher pressure,

Read More »

Interior trims environmental reviews to speed project development

The US DOI issued a final rule to reform NEPA, aiming to speed up energy project approvals on federal lands by reducing procedural delays and clarifying review processes, despite criticism from environmental groups. Feb. 24, 2026 2 min read Key Highlights The final rule streamlines environmental review processes for energy projects on federal lands, aiming to reduce approval times. It clarifies roles for federal, state, local, and tribal agencies, including procedures for public comments on significant projects. Environmental groups and Democratic attorneys general have challenged the rule, citing concerns over diminished public participation and environmental protections. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum emphasizes that the reforms restore NEPA to its original purpose of informing decisions without unnecessary delays. The rule adopts over 80% of provisions from the draft NEPA reform.

Read More »

JLL: Hyperscale and AI Demand Push North American Data Centers Toward Industrial Scale

JLL’s North America Data Center Report Year-End 2025 makes a clear argument that the sector is no longer merely expanding but has shifted into a phase of industrial-scale acceleration driven by hyperscalers, AI platforms, and capital markets that increasingly treat digital infrastructure as core, bond-like collateral. The report’s central thesis is straightforward. Structural demand has overwhelmed traditional real estate cycles. JLL supports that claim with a set of reinforcing signals: Vacancy remains pinned near zero. Most new supply is pre-leased years ahead. Rents continue to climb. Debt markets remain highly liquid. Investors are engineering new financial structures to sustain growth. Author Andrew Batson notes that JLL’s Data Center Solutions team significantly expanded its methodology for this edition, incorporating substantially more hyperscale and owner-occupied capacity along with more than 40 additional markets. The subtitle — “The data center sector shifts into hyperdrive” — serves as an apt one-line summary of the report’s posture. The methodological change is not cosmetic. By incorporating hyper-owned infrastructure, total market size increases, vacancy compresses, and historical time series shift accordingly. JLL is explicit that these revisions reflect improved visibility into the market rather than a change in underlying fundamentals; and, if anything, suggest prior reports understated the sector’s true scale. The Market in Three Words: Tight, Pre-Leased, Relentless The report’s key highlights page serves as an executive brief for investors, offering a concise snapshot of market conditions that remain historically constrained. Vacancy stands at just 1%, unchanged year over year, while 92% of capacity currently under construction is already pre-leased. At the same time, geographic diversification continues to accelerate, with 64% of new builds now occurring in so-called frontier markets. JLL also notes that Texas, when viewed as a unified market, could surpass Northern Virginia as the top data center market by 2030, even as capital

Read More »

7×24 Exchange’s Dennis Cronin on the Data Center Workforce Crisis: The Talent Cliff Is Already Here

The data center industry has spent the past two years obsessing over power constraints, AI density, and supply chain pressure. But according to longtime mission critical leader Dennis Cronin, the sector’s most consequential bottleneck may be far more human. In a recent episode of the Data Center Frontier Show Podcast, Cronin — a founding member of 7×24 Exchange International and board member of the Mission Critical Global Alliance (MCGA) — delivered a stark message: the workforce “talent cliff” the industry keeps discussing as a future risk is already impacting operations today. A Million-Job Gap Emerging Cronin’s assessment reframes the workforce conversation from a routine labor shortage to what he describes as a structural and demographic challenge. Based on recent analysis of open roles, he estimates the industry is currently short between 467,000 and 498,000 workers across core operational positions including facilities managers, operations engineers, electricians, generator technicians, and HVAC specialists. Layer in emerging roles tied to AI infrastructure, sustainability, and cyber-physical security, and the potential demand rises to roughly one million jobs. “The coming talent cliff is not coming,” Cronin said. “It’s here, here and now.” With data center capacity expanding at roughly 30% annually, the workforce pipeline is not keeping pace with physical buildout. The Five-Year Experience Trap One of the industry’s most persistent self-inflicted wounds, Cronin argues, is the widespread requirement for five years of experience in roles that are effectively entry level. The result is a closed-loop hiring dynamic: New workers can’t get hired without experience They can’t gain experience without being hired Operators end up poaching from each other Workers may benefit from the resulting 10–20% salary jumps, but the overall talent pool remains stagnant. “It’s not helping us grow the industry,” Cronin said. In a market defined by rapid expansion and increasing system complexity, that

Read More »

Aeroderivative Turbines Move to the Center of AI Data Center Power Strategy

From “Backup” to “Bridging” to Behind-the-Meter Power Plants The most important shift is conceptual: these systems are increasingly blurring the boundary between emergency backup and primary power supply. Traditionally, data center electrical architecture has been clearly tiered: UPS (seconds to minutes) to ride through utility disturbances and generator start. Diesel gensets (minutes to hours or days) for extended outages. Utility grid as the primary power source. What’s changing is the rise of bridging power:  generation deployed to energize a site before the permanent grid connection is ready, or before sufficient utility capacity becomes available. Providers such as APR Energy now explicitly market turbine-based solutions to data centers seeking behind-the-meter capacity while awaiting utility build-out. That framing matters because it fundamentally changes expected runtime. A generator that operates for a few hours per year is one regulatory category. A turbine that runs continuously for weeks or months while a campus ramps is something very different; and it is drawing increased scrutiny from regulators who are beginning to treat these installations as material generation assets rather than temporary backup systems. The near-term driver is straightforward. AI workloads are arriving faster than grid infrastructure can keep pace. Data Center Frontier and other industry observers have documented the growing scramble for onsite generation as interconnection queues lengthen and critical equipment lead times expand. Mainstream financial and business media have taken notice. The Financial Times has reported on data centers turning to aeroderivative turbines and diesel fleets to bypass multi-year power delays. Reuters has likewise covered large gas-turbine-centric strategies tied to hyperscale campuses, underscoring how quickly the co-located generation model is moving into the mainstream. At the same time, demand pressure is tightening turbine supply chains. Industry reporting points to extended waits for new units, one reason repurposed engine cores and mobile aeroderivative packages are gaining

Read More »

Cooling’s New Reality: It’s Not Air vs. Liquid Anymore. It’s Architecture.

By early 2026, the data center cooling conversation has started to sound less like a product catalog and more like a systems engineering summit. The old framing – air cooling versus liquid cooling – still matters, but it increasingly misses the point. AI-era facilities are being defined by thermal constraints that run from chip-level cold plates to facility heat rejection, with critical decisions now shaped by pumping power, fluid selection, reliability under ambient extremes, water availability, and manufacturing throughput. That full-stack shift is written all over a grab bag of recent cooling announcements. On one end of the spectrum we see a Department of Energy-funded breakthrough aimed directly at next-generation GPU heat flux. On the other, it’s OEM product launches built to withstand –20°F to 140°F operating conditions and recover full cooling capacity within minutes of a power interruption. In between we find a major acquisition move for advanced liquid cooling IP, a manufacturing expansion that more than doubles footprint, and the quiet rise of refrigerants and heat-transfer fluids as design-level considerations. What’s emerging is a new reality. Cooling is becoming one of the primary constraints on AI deployment technically, economically, and geographically. The winners will be the players that can integrate the whole stack and scale it. 1) The Chip-level Arms Race: Single-phase Fights for More Runway The most “pure engineering” signal in this news batch comes from HRL Laboratories, which on Feb. 24, 2026 unveiled details of a single-phase direct liquid cooling approach called Low-Chill™. HRL’s framing is pointed: the industry wants higher GPU and rack power densities, but many operators are wary of the cost and operational complexity of two-phase cooling. HRL says Low-Chill was developed under the U.S. Department of Energy’s ARPA-E COOLERCHIPS program, and claims a leap that goes straight at the bottleneck. It can increase

Read More »

Policy Shock: Big Tech Told to Power Its Own AI Buildout

The AI data center boom has been colliding with grid reality for more than two years. This week, the issue moved closer to the policy front lines. The White House is advancing a “ratepayer protection” framework that has gained visibility in recent days, aimed at ensuring large AI data center projects do not shift grid upgrade costs onto residential customers. It’s a signal widely interpreted by industry observers as encouraging hyperscalers to bring dedicated power solutions to the table. The Power Question Moves to Center Stage Washington now appears poised to push the industry toward a structural response to the data center power conundrum. The new federal impetus for major technology companies to shoulder the cost of their own power infrastructure is quickly emerging as one of the most consequential policy developments for the digital infrastructure sector in 2026. If formalized, the initiative would effectively codify a shift already underway which has found hyperscale and AI developers moving aggressively toward behind-the-meter generation and dedicated energy strategies. For an industry already grappling with interconnection delays, utility pushback, and mounting community scrutiny, the signal is unmistakable. The era of relying primarily on shared grid capacity for large AI campuses may be ending. From Market Trend to Policy Direction Large tech firms, including the biggest cloud and AI players, have been under increasing pressure from regulators and utilities concerned about ratepayer exposure and grid reliability. Policymakers are now signaling that future large-load approvals may hinge on whether developers can demonstrate energy self-sufficiency or dedicated supply. The logic is straightforward. AI campuses are arriving at hundreds of megawatts to gigawatt scale. Transmission upgrades are measured in multi-year timelines. Utilities face growing political pressure to protect residential customers. In that context, the emerging federal posture does not create a new trend so much as accelerate

Read More »

Enterprise Spotlight: Data Center Modernization

The demands for, and challenges of, deploying AI applications has ratcheted up the urgency to bring data centers into the AI age. It’s a strategic imperative and success requires partners across the infrastructure spectrum, from servers and storage to high-performance computing, networking, software, and security. IT leaders, intensely focused on data center modernization, need strategies, roadmaps, and products that will get them there. Download the March 2026 issue of the Enterprise Spotlight from the editors of CIO, Computerworld, CSO, InfoWorld, and Network World and learn how data center modernization is taking shape in 2026.

Read More »

Microsoft will invest $80B in AI data centers in fiscal 2025

And Microsoft isn’t the only one that is ramping up its investments into AI-enabled data centers. Rival cloud service providers are all investing in either upgrading or opening new data centers to capture a larger chunk of business from developers and users of large language models (LLMs).  In a report published in October 2024, Bloomberg Intelligence estimated that demand for generative AI would push Microsoft, AWS, Google, Oracle, Meta, and Apple would between them devote $200 billion to capex in 2025, up from $110 billion in 2023. Microsoft is one of the biggest spenders, followed closely by Google and AWS, Bloomberg Intelligence said. Its estimate of Microsoft’s capital spending on AI, at $62.4 billion for calendar 2025, is lower than Smith’s claim that the company will invest $80 billion in the fiscal year to June 30, 2025. Both figures, though, are way higher than Microsoft’s 2020 capital expenditure of “just” $17.6 billion. The majority of the increased spending is tied to cloud services and the expansion of AI infrastructure needed to provide compute capacity for OpenAI workloads. Separately, last October Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said his company planned total capex spend of $75 billion in 2024 and even more in 2025, with much of it going to AWS, its cloud computing division.

Read More »

John Deere unveils more autonomous farm machines to address skill labor shortage

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More Self-driving tractors might be the path to self-driving cars. John Deere has revealed a new line of autonomous machines and tech across agriculture, construction and commercial landscaping. The Moline, Illinois-based John Deere has been in business for 187 years, yet it’s been a regular as a non-tech company showing off technology at the big tech trade show in Las Vegas and is back at CES 2025 with more autonomous tractors and other vehicles. This is not something we usually cover, but John Deere has a lot of data that is interesting in the big picture of tech. The message from the company is that there aren’t enough skilled farm laborers to do the work that its customers need. It’s been a challenge for most of the last two decades, said Jahmy Hindman, CTO at John Deere, in a briefing. Much of the tech will come this fall and after that. He noted that the average farmer in the U.S. is over 58 and works 12 to 18 hours a day to grow food for us. And he said the American Farm Bureau Federation estimates there are roughly 2.4 million farm jobs that need to be filled annually; and the agricultural work force continues to shrink. (This is my hint to the anti-immigration crowd). John Deere’s autonomous 9RX Tractor. Farmers can oversee it using an app. While each of these industries experiences their own set of challenges, a commonality across all is skilled labor availability. In construction, about 80% percent of contractors struggle to find skilled labor. And in commercial landscaping, 86% of landscaping business owners can’t find labor to fill open positions, he said. “They have to figure out how to do

Read More »

2025 playbook for enterprise AI success, from agents to evals

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More 2025 is poised to be a pivotal year for enterprise AI. The past year has seen rapid innovation, and this year will see the same. This has made it more critical than ever to revisit your AI strategy to stay competitive and create value for your customers. From scaling AI agents to optimizing costs, here are the five critical areas enterprises should prioritize for their AI strategy this year. 1. Agents: the next generation of automation AI agents are no longer theoretical. In 2025, they’re indispensable tools for enterprises looking to streamline operations and enhance customer interactions. Unlike traditional software, agents powered by large language models (LLMs) can make nuanced decisions, navigate complex multi-step tasks, and integrate seamlessly with tools and APIs. At the start of 2024, agents were not ready for prime time, making frustrating mistakes like hallucinating URLs. They started getting better as frontier large language models themselves improved. “Let me put it this way,” said Sam Witteveen, cofounder of Red Dragon, a company that develops agents for companies, and that recently reviewed the 48 agents it built last year. “Interestingly, the ones that we built at the start of the year, a lot of those worked way better at the end of the year just because the models got better.” Witteveen shared this in the video podcast we filmed to discuss these five big trends in detail. Models are getting better and hallucinating less, and they’re also being trained to do agentic tasks. Another feature that the model providers are researching is a way to use the LLM as a judge, and as models get cheaper (something we’ll cover below), companies can use three or more models to

Read More »

OpenAI’s red teaming innovations define new essentials for security leaders in the AI era

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More OpenAI has taken a more aggressive approach to red teaming than its AI competitors, demonstrating its security teams’ advanced capabilities in two areas: multi-step reinforcement and external red teaming. OpenAI recently released two papers that set a new competitive standard for improving the quality, reliability and safety of AI models in these two techniques and more. The first paper, “OpenAI’s Approach to External Red Teaming for AI Models and Systems,” reports that specialized teams outside the company have proven effective in uncovering vulnerabilities that might otherwise have made it into a released model because in-house testing techniques may have missed them. In the second paper, “Diverse and Effective Red Teaming with Auto-Generated Rewards and Multi-Step Reinforcement Learning,” OpenAI introduces an automated framework that relies on iterative reinforcement learning to generate a broad spectrum of novel, wide-ranging attacks. Going all-in on red teaming pays practical, competitive dividends It’s encouraging to see competitive intensity in red teaming growing among AI companies. When Anthropic released its AI red team guidelines in June of last year, it joined AI providers including Google, Microsoft, Nvidia, OpenAI, and even the U.S.’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which all had released red teaming frameworks. Investing heavily in red teaming yields tangible benefits for security leaders in any organization. OpenAI’s paper on external red teaming provides a detailed analysis of how the company strives to create specialized external teams that include cybersecurity and subject matter experts. The goal is to see if knowledgeable external teams can defeat models’ security perimeters and find gaps in their security, biases and controls that prompt-based testing couldn’t find. What makes OpenAI’s recent papers noteworthy is how well they define using human-in-the-middle

Read More »