Unable to replace Workflow in Collection

We have a collection for workflows and schedules, used by myself and one colleague. Yesterday a change was made by my colleague to a regularly scheduled workflow, which unfortunately introduced a small error. I have corrected the error (downloaded the workflow from the gallery, fixed, uploaded back to the gallery), but when I come to use the 'Replace Workflow' option, I cannot select it as it is greyed out.

Is there any kind of setting that might allow us to amend and replace each other's workflows?

Workflow

Accepted answers

OllieClarke

@nickdreach
Just tried it out with a simple workflow. I could publish a new version of a workflow owned by someone else that lived in a different private studio using the API

You can chose who the owner of the new version is, but I don't think you can chose the private studio. So the new version of the workflow now resides in my private studio (whereas before it was in my colleague Luke's).

The setup using the api documentation was pretty straightforward. Although you need to have a .yxzp in order to publish (and automating the creation of these is not as simple as creating and renaming a .zip.

Anything else you want me to test?

All comments

nickdreach

Nobody? How do you all work collaboratively? I even tried adding the amended workflow directly to the collection, but my colleague cannot 'see' it when she tries to do the Replace Workflow for me.

OllieClarke

Hi @nickdreach,

If you have the permissions to update assets in the collection, then you can open your colleague's workflow from designer, edit it, then save it to create a new version of it on gallery.

I believe (although I'd love to be wrong) that you can only replace workflows that exist in your private studio. Likewise (again I believe) the list of workflows which appear under the replace workflow drop down is limited to those in your private studio.

Ollie

nickdreach

Thanks for the reply @OllieClarke . I have the permission to update assets - but I don't want to propagate multiple versions of a workflow. I suspect you are correct with regards to the replace workflows functionality. Below is a possibly useful article, but it feels a somewhat fraught process. I have contacted alteryx support today, perhaps they will have a better take on this:
https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Server-Knowledge-Base/How-to-move-from-Subscriptions-to-Collections-in-Server/ta-p/1137150

OllieClarke

@nickdreach
If you have update asset permissions, then as long as you open the workflow from gallery, and save (rather than save as), it will update the original version to the new, rather than create a new asset (which would happen if you save as). This would keep the versioning, although you wouldn't be able to change the published version (as again I believe this is linked to private studios).

Unfortunately I don't believe atm you can replace a workflow in a different studio as I said.

This is a pain point for me as well, so please update if support come back with a solution (other than all being in the same studio, which is a bad idea imo)

Ollie

nickdreach

Hi @OllieClarke , thanks for the follow up. The point about opening from the gallery is interesting. We have multiple VPNs, one for Alteryx, another for our database, so we'd typically go on to the Alteryx VPN, grab the workflow by going to the Collection, and downloading. Then switch VPN to database, make changes with Designer and finally use the Save As / Alteryx Server option (having gone back on the VPN).

I will report back with anything of interest from support 👍

nickdreach

While I wait for support to get back to me, I'm bumping this topic.

How does every else work collaboratively, with more than one developer using Alteryx and working interchangeably on one another's workflows?

Are you sharing a studio or is there some way to have your own private studio yet be able to share workflows and schedules via a collection including the ability to 'Replace Workflow' on a workflow you don't own in a collection you have access to. All feedback greatfully received, even if it is just 'We had the same problem, couldn't resolve it, so we only work on our own stuff'!

nickdreach

Another bump today, as I've made some progress, sort of. Following this thread:
https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Server-Discussions/Workflow-Migration-Overwrite-between-different-user/td-p/1137337
I got my colleague to put a simple workflow on the alteryx server in our shared collection. I then downloaded it, made a change and did a Save to put it straight back on the server. But, the Location box on the Save Workflow dialogue is fixed to my Studio - so I can go ahead and send it back up - but it doesn't do the equivalent of 'Replace Workflow' - just creates a new version, in my Studio.

However, what I haven't mentioned is VPNs. We have one for Alteryx and another for our database. So in the scenario above, what I actually did was go on to the Alteryx VPN and grab my colleague's workflow - then once it was open I switched to the database VPN - made my changes...then switched back to the Alteryx VPN prior to send up to the server.

If I stay on the Alteryx VPN (which isn't actually practical if you are making any kind of database related changes), make my change then go to Save - this time the 'Location' box is pre-populated with the Collection name - and this does have the effect of Replace Workflow.

So, we need a single VPN to cover both database and Alteryx - which is in the pipeline - but won't be here any time soon.

I hope this helps someone!

nickdreach

After a couple of weeks of to-ing and fro-ing with support they suggested the following:

Save the workflow directly back to the Server, not to a local file that's published as a different workflow and necessitating margin workflows.
Make changes locally. When ready to publish, open the old version from the Server and Copy-and-paste the content of the updated workflow, then re-save to the Server

I was a bit non-plussed by this, apart from anything else our workflows tend to the more complex, with multiple layers of macros etc.

Anyway, to be fair to support when I questioned the above as maybe not exactly being what you could call a robust workflow, they kindly offered to do a Teams call. So we'll see how that goes. It does seems that I'm going to have to share a studio with a colleague, braving the one off associated pain that comes with having to republish and schedule various workflows.

nickdreach

Update on the call from Alteryx. They took us through opening direct from the server (File / Open Workflow / My Company's Server) - making a small change and republishing, by simply pressing Save (NOT save as).

For a larger change, grab the workflow locally, make your changes and test. Then open the original workflow from the server as above, delete the contents of the canvas, paste in the contents of the canvas you were working on locally and, then Save (not save as).

This is ok for simple workflows, maybe, although we've run in to issues with e.g. google credentials being lost. And we don't really have simple workflows.

Alteryx will get back to us on the following points - do newer versions of the tool resolve this problem (they thought not but wanted to check) and will publishing changes via API help (again, they thought not but wanted to prove it).

We are starting to consider maybe storing versions of our workflows in Bitbucket and only having the latest on the server. They did mention that some companies will have a single studio shared between dozens of people - we're keen to avoid this particular fudge if we can.

@OllieClarke

OllieClarke

@nickdreach going back to your post on VPNs, when you're on the Alteryx VPN, who are you logged in as? And what user is the gallery connection under?

nickdreach

@OllieClarke I'm on the VPN as 'me' and I have my own 'server' account which I use for the gallery. Alteryx were, in their words, 'sorry' that we have to toggle between two VPNs - not sure they'd seen it before. It is on our roadmap to fix, but it sounds like it isn't anywhere near the top of the list. One slight silver lining is I found that you could open a workflow direct from the server, decide you'd definitely have to switch VPNs to e.g. complete an execution of a database-based workflow....on succesful completion you can switch back to the Alteryx VPN and do a Save (not save as) and somehow it knows 'where it came from' and you can publish back over the top of the original that you opened.

By the time you throw in some difficulties with Python-based tools like Google Drive Input, AMP, macros and credentials for the same, we're having quite a mediocre time at the moment!

nickdreach

Oh and on your API point, I totally agree - just because you are not selecting from menus and pressing buttons, under the hood I'd be 99% certain that the API just replicates the menu selections and button pressing.....and therefore encounters the same restrictions.

nickdreach

@OllieClarke interesting response from Alteryx:
The latest 23.1 release doesn't have anything different that helps. However:

In 23.1 we introduce an API endpoint POST /v3/workflows/{workflowId}/versions that allows Curator_B to upload a new version of User_A's workflow (example image below). When you upgrade to 23.1 this will be another option for you that's easy to perform in the Server UI's API documentation or automate in a workflow using the Server API Tool
https://marketplace.alteryx.com/en-US/apps/418052/server-api-tool

Sadly that upgrade is some way away, for us - but interesting that the API will, in theory, 'fill the functionality gap'

OllieClarke

@nickdreach that is cool - I'll have to test it out

nickdreach

@OllieClarke Ah do you have that version? It'd be gold dust to me if you could post back your findings!

OllieClarke

nickdreach

@OllieClarke wow - I should mark that post as the solution! Thank you very much for taking the time to do that. If you have the inclination, what if you create a new Collection, add both you and Luke to it as users and get Luke to upload one of his workflows? You then get that workflow from the Collection. Make a micro change to the workflow. Can you then leverage the API to upload the minimally changed version of the workflow? Does it still behave as above e.g. it might originally have been owned by Luke, but the version 2 (Published) actual lives in your studio - but Luke can access it via the collection? This looks very promising.

OllieClarke

@nickdreach that's exactly what I did

The Schedule Test workflow was in a collection just for Luke and me. Luke initially made the workflow, so it lived in his private studio under his files.

I slightly amended the workflow, saved it as a .yxzp and then used the API to publish a new version.

As I set Luke as the owner of the workflow still, I can view it under my shared with me files, but not my files.
From his perspective, even though the workflow is in my private studio, it's still under his files (as he's the owner).

We can both access the workflow through the collection

OllieClarke

@nickdreach so the API does solve this issue, but through the Gallery UI, now that the workflow is in my studio, Luke cannot see, nor change the version history of the workflow. Just something to be aware of

nickdreach

@OllieClarke Perfect this looks good. I wonder how long it'll take us to upgrade!

nickdreach

@OllieClarke arg that is less than optimal. The sooner studios are done away with the better.

Quick Links

This months top contributors

atcodedog05 19598

Qiu 15875

binu_acs 15708

MarqueeCrew 13708

apathetichell 13703