Microsoft Fabric and Azure data platforms in Navan: architecture, capacity and cost
How to build a Microsoft Fabric or Azure data platform for a Navan organisation: medallion layout for food and drink manufacturing and construction and real estate, honest capacity sizing, Direct Lake trade-offs and the Ireland residency position.
Local view for Navan, Ireland
Microsoft Fabric is a genuine step forward and a genuine way to spend money quickly, and which one you get depends almost entirely on decisions made in the first fortnight.
This page is about building a data platform for an organisation in Navan, Microsoft Fabric, Azure Synapse, Data Factory and the lakehouse patterns underneath them, with the local economy taken seriously. Navan's base in food and drink manufacturing, construction and real estate, and logistics and freight determines the data volumes, the latency requirements and the retention obligations, and those three things decide the architecture. The client population here is shaped by food processing and agricultural services and construction and building products.
Does a Navan organisation actually need Fabric?
The case for Fabric gets strong when more than one of these holds: import models under strain, the same data needed through both SQL and notebooks, governed self-service for several teams, retention that a desktop model cannot carry, or a Premium capacity already on the bill. One analyst maintaining three import models that refresh in twenty minutes does not need a capacity, and buying one will not improve anything.
| Situation | Recommendation | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Under about 10 GB of modelled data, one or two authors, overnight refresh is fine | Stay on Power BI Pro with import models | A capacity adds cost and operational surface with no benefit you can measure |
| Refresh windows no longer fit overnight, incremental refresh already in use | Lakehouse or warehouse serving layer | The constraint is transformation throughput, not the reporting tool |
| Analysts need SQL, data scientists need notebooks, both on the same data | Fabric, serving layer first | One copy of the data with multiple engines is the thing Fabric genuinely does well |
| Retention obligations measured in years at event grain | Lakehouse with lifecycle policies | Delta on cheap storage is far less expensive than keeping history in a semantic model |
| Existing Synapse or Databricks platform that works and costs are stable | Keep it; surface through Fabric or Power BI | Re-platforming a working estate to tidy an architecture diagram is not a business case |
What the data actually looks like in Navan
Construction and real estate
Project cost and progress data with subcontractor valuations, variations and retentions, plus asset and tenancy data on the property side. Source systems typically include project costing systems, ERP, BIM and design systems, site progress apps and property management systems.
For a platform design, the consequence is specific. Project reporting runs monthly on manually consolidated spreadsheets, so a problem contract is identified two months after it turned. So the architecture has to make the raw grain replayable rather than aggregating at ingestion, and the first serving model should be a project cost and valuation model with variations and retentions explicit, so margin erosion is visible while the project is live.
Retail
Transaction-level sales with returns, promotions and loyalty discounts layered on top, plus stock positions that differ between systems. Returns posted in a later period against a different channel quietly corrupt both weekly margin and channel comparison.
Systems to plan for: EPOS, ERP, warehouse management, loyalty platform and workforce management. Loyalty and marketing analytics require a consent-aware customer model, so consent state has to be a dimension rather than a filter applied late.
Food and drink manufacturing
Short shelf life, high SKU churn, promotional volatility and retailer scorecards that measure you on their definitions rather than yours. Internal service levels read green while the retailer scorecard reads amber, because the two measure different events. HACCP and traceability obligations mean batch records must be retrievable quickly enough to support a withdrawal within hours.
A medallion layout for a construction and real estate business
The medallion pattern is not complicated, and it is routinely implemented badly: a bronze layer that has already lost fidelity, a silver layer with no testable rules, and a gold layer that is really just the silver layer with different names. Here is how we would lay it out for a Navan client in construction and real estate.
| Layer | What lands here | Ownership | Rules |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bronze | Raw extracts from project costing systems, ERP and BIM and design systems, at source grain, with ingestion metadata | Platform team | Append-only, replayable for any date, no business logic, retention set against your obligations |
| Silver | Conformed, deduplicated, type-safe entities with the agreed business keys | Platform team with domain sign-off | Every transformation testable; data quality assertions block promotion on failure |
| Gold | Dimensional models for reporting: project cost and valuation model with variations and retentions explicit | Domain team | One definition per measure, documented; changes go through review |
| Semantic | Direct Lake or import model serving reports and Excel | Analytics engineering | No business logic that is not also in gold; measure dictionary maintained |
Capacity sizing and what it really costs
Fabric capacity is billed by capacity unit. An F2 is roughly US$0.36 per hour pay-as-you-go, about US$260 a month, with around 40 per cent off for a one-year reservation. An F64, the smallest SKU at which report consumers no longer need an individual Pro licence, is roughly US$8,400 a month pay-as-you-go or around US$5,000 reserved.
The arithmetic that matters: F64 only becomes cheaper than per-user licensing somewhere in the region of 350 to 600 readers, depending on the discount you actually pay and whether you reserve capacity. Below that, Pro or PPU per user is normally the right answer, and buying capacity for prestige is a straightforward waste of money.
| Option | Who it suits | Approximate list price | The catch |
|---|---|---|---|
| Power BI Free | One person exploring data with no sharing | No charge | Cannot share into a workspace, so it is not a business option |
| Power BI Pro | Small reader populations, typically under about 200 people | Around US$14 per user per month at list | Every reader needs a licence, so cost scales linearly with the audience |
| Premium Per User | Teams needing larger models, higher refresh rates or paginated reports | Around US$24 per user per month at list | Still per-user, so a large reader base gets expensive quickly |
| Fabric F2, F32 capacity | Data engineering workloads with a modest reader population | From roughly US$260 a month for an F2, pay-as-you-go | Readers still need Pro licences below F64, and small SKUs throttle under load |
| Fabric F64 capacity | Large reader populations and in-platform data engineering | Roughly US$8,400 a month pay-as-you-go, around US$5,000 reserved | Only pays for itself above roughly 350 to 600 readers, depending on your discount |
The sizing exercise is empirical: profile each workload, separate background refresh from interactive query, count real concurrency, find the true peak, then prove the number on a short-lived capacity before anything is bought. The output is a sizing model that states expected utilisation at launch, at double the readers, and the specific point at which you would need the next SKU. Always price from the current Microsoft rate card for your region and agreement. Any figure in an article older than a quarter should be treated as an order of magnitude, not a quote.
Direct Lake, import or DirectQuery
The appeal of Direct Lake is that nothing is copied and nothing is refreshed. The risk is the fallback: one unsupported construct and the model quietly behaves like DirectQuery instead. We test it against an import model on your own data and choose on the measured result. In practice Direct Lake tends to win on large, frequently landing tables, which construction and real estate workloads often are, while import still wins on smaller models with heavy DAX.
Migrating from what you have now
Few Navan organisations start from nothing. The realistic options are a serving-layer-first adoption, where Fabric takes the gold layer and reporting while existing engineering stays in place, or a domain-by-domain migration with the old platform retained until each domain is validated. Both keep the old platform running until each domain is proven. The alternative, moving everything at once, is how migrations end up reversed. The reference pipeline we build first is usually the system that hurts most, which here is normally project costing systems.
Residency, latency and the Ireland question
North Europe sits in Dublin, so Irish organisations get in-country residency on the region most of Europe treats as its default. The practical consequence is excellent latency and a short list of residency questions, though cross-border processing still has to be documented where a service falls back to another region.
For Navan specifically, North Europe (Dublin) is the normal choice. Latency from Navan to that region is not usually a constraint for analytical workloads; the constraints that bite are feature availability per region and the processor chain your data protection officer will ask about.
- Ireland hosts the EU establishment of many multinationals, so the DPC is frequently the lead supervisory authority, which raises the bar on analytics documentation well above local headcount.
- The Central Bank's outsourcing and operational resilience expectations apply to cloud analytics platforms used by regulated firms.
- EU-level obligations (DORA, NIS2, CSRD and the AI Act) apply in full, and the Irish implementation timetable is worth tracking per obligation.
Where to go next
If you are weighing a platform decision for a Navan organisation, a workload assessment will answer it with evidence in two to three weeks, and the written recommendation is yours whatever you decide. Book a technical review.
We work across Ireland and deliver into neighbouring markets regularly. Nearby pages worth reading if your group has sites elsewhere: Drogheda, Naas, Balbriggan, Portlaoise, Cavan and Newbridge.
Frequently asked questions
Is Microsoft Fabric worth it for a mid-sized Navan business?
Sometimes. No single condition justifies a capacity. Several together do: data that no longer fits an import model, a requirement for both SQL and notebook access, multiple teams needing governed self-service, retention obligations beyond what a desktop file can hold, or a Premium capacity you already pay for. If one analyst maintains three models that refresh in twenty minutes, a capacity is a cost without a return, and we will put that in writing.
How do we size a Fabric capacity without guessing?
By measuring. Each workload is profiled for compute shape and concurrency, mapped to capacity units, then validated on a trial capacity using your real data. You get a sizing model showing utilisation at launch, at double the users, and the point at which the next SKU becomes necessary.
Can Fabric coexist with our existing Synapse or Databricks platform?
Yes, and for most organisations that is the pragmatic path. Shortcuts and mirroring let Fabric read data in place, so you can serve analytics from Fabric without re-platforming the engineering layer. The usual recommendation is to let Fabric take the serving layer first and decide the rest on evidence, not on a migration plan drawn before anything was measured.
Where will our data physically sit?
North Europe sits in Dublin, so Irish organisations get in-country residency on the region most of Europe treats as its default. The practical consequence is excellent latency and a short list of residency questions, though cross-border processing still has to be documented where a service falls back to another region.
What does this cost for an organisation in Navan?
A workload assessment is a fixed fee in the low five figures. A landing zone plus a reference pipeline is typically a six to ten week engagement; full programmes run in quarterly increments and are quoted per phase. Platform licensing is separate and should be priced from the current Microsoft rate card for Ireland.
Who operates the platform afterwards?
Your team, with explicit layer ownership documented, or us under a managed service if you would rather not carry the on-call. Either way the runbooks, architecture decisions and monitoring configuration are yours from day one. Navan draws on the Dublin catchment, which makes commuting rather than local supply the main source of analytics skills.
Read next
Data governance and GDPR for Navan organisations: controls that produce evidence
Practical data governance for analytics estates in Navan: what the Data Protection Commission (DPC) expects under the EU GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, the sector rules that bite locally, Microsoft Purview in practice, and a 90-day plan.
Power BI consultancy in Navan: what it costs, what breaks and what to build first
A practical guide to Power BI consultancy in Navan: the definition traps in food and drink manufacturing and construction and real estate, honest licensing arithmetic, hire-versus-engage costs, and the compliance position under the EU GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018.
Microsoft Fabric: the build-or-wait decision, with the cases where the answer is wait
A decision framework for Microsoft Fabric adoption: the five conditions that justify a capacity, medallion architecture that works, capacity sizing from measured consumption, and the situations where staying on Power BI Pro is correct.