Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Turning off Flow and turning back on still create new instances of Flow


Currently we are working on a bunch of flow automation logic with SharePoint connectors. The issue we have is that flow queues SharePoint list item changes even when the flow is turned off. Since we have many SharePoint metadata that are updated in bulk while testing, there are many flows that are triggered on error data after turned on. We don't want this to happen. When we turn off the flow, we want it to not run later.

When we turn off the flow, we want it to not run later.

Status: Under Review

Thank you for the suggestion. As is covered in the comments this is not a bug but an important feature to avoid data loss -- this allows you to temporarily disable a flow, make corrections, and then enable the flow, running it over all of the events that happened in the interim. Without this functionality all of those business critical events would be lost.


That being said, there may be scenarios where you want to explicitly discard your business data -- to support that case we'll look at adding an option to delete the trigger data so you can start again from scratch.

Helper I

Any updates on this?


Much needed



Frequent Visitor

Agreed that this a major oversight.  The answer that "it's not a bug, it's a feature" is infuriatingly lacking.  The primary goal is document/item maintenance, and it's inevitable that some maintenance work is going to be required on most lists/libraries where the Flow needs to be disabled.  


This is only a "feature" in a specific use case where the list/library is accessible to other users who may still be creating/modifying items when the Flow is turned off (for Flow maintenance).  Sure, in that scenario you'd want the Flow to run.  Otherwise, its a bug that can CAUSE data loss by overwriting manually-entered information. 


This should be an OPTION, not a default.  The fact that there's not any way to exclude items from automated flows is a deal-breaker for some lists and libraries.  The end goal is correct records, not a perfect Flow history. 

Advocate II

This really doesn't make sense to turn something "off" only for it to run again later. Isn't that more like a "pause" button?


A quick idea I've had is to insert a condition at the beginning of your Flow that would always be false then terminate the Flow. Do this then turn your Flow back on to let it "catch up" and remove the condition.


Really shouldn't be any workarounds needed for something like this.

Advocate I

Please fix this ASAP. I just had a scenario where a status indicator name was changed in a  SharePoint status field and I had to update 380 items to the new status indicator. I switched the flow off and as soon as I switched it back on, it started sending out email notifications on items that were resolved ages ago. 

It is definately not a feature!

Frequent Visitor

Please give us the option to turn off a flow vs Pause.. which is what this currently is. 

Frequent Visitor

I can't believe this was originally asked for back in 2017 and yet there has been no change to the way this feature works?! 


I too have  just fallen foul of this, although thankfully not to the degree that some others have. 


That being said, sending out over 1000 emails to 45 people across the business is a less than ideal outcome. 


Please, please add a fix for this, or at least change the name! 


An off switch that isn't an off switch, whatever next. 

Regular Visitor

This is causing a major issue at a large O365 migration program for a Fortune 500 organization we're working with.  Microsoft - PLEASE PRIORITIZE THIS.  This particular organization is evaluating whether to push major adoption of Flow, and it's causing a lack of trust in the Power platform.  

Not applicable

It is very difficult to make updates using the save as feature as a workaround as it is very time consuming. 
Please let us know if this update would be done?

Super User



at first I was frustrated by this during migration efforts, but a simple interim fix is to add a terminate action right after your flow trigger. then it runs the flow but does not do anything.  Agreed that it'd be great to be able to choose whether the flows run with a toggle button or something.

New Member

I was hoping to implement MS flow in our business, however due to this critical issue there is no way I can confidently and in good faith roll out the use of it.


That this is an 'important feature' is absurd.