Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas

In other data programs like access or Toad you can put conditions on a join. You can choose if something is greater than, less than, left join, right join, etc.
But with Alteryx you are only allowed to join a perfect match. It would be really great if you could add that functionality into 9.0

Implement an option to toggle the automatic creation of the .bak file or allow a destination different than the yxmd file.
Once we have our files under code control (git) the bak file is not necessary and effectively doubles our storage usage.

A client has requested that we provide the ability to have the two digit year begin a date string.  Currently, we have the following:

yyyy-MM-dd
yyyy-MM-dd hh:mm:ss
yyyy*MM*dd
yyyyMMdd

In addition, they have requested that we have the ability to convert from a date field to another date field.  Currently, we can only convert to/from a string to date and vice versa, but not date to date (which would be helpful in a date format).

I'd like to see some added configuration in the Chart tool to allow more space for the chart legend so that the names of elements don't have to be truncated.  The only way to eliminate truncation right now is to decrease the font size and/or increase the width of the table which also in effect reduces the font size.  This is specifically an issue in "Stacked Column" or similar charts.

This should be quite easy to implement. I think it would be great if could we have:

1. A User repository for macros in the Users folder, e.g. My DocumentsMy Alteryx Macros

This would make it easier to install macros without needing any administrator rights

2. A right click operation on a yxmc file (or a menu operation in Alteryx) that Install the macro ie. will move any macro into the folder above.

This would make it very simple to show new users how to install any macro you send them

Both these ideas will make it easier for partners and the Alteryx user community to share macros.
 

It would be great if the mapping allowed point themes to be bi-variate, i.e. you could change the size of a point at the same time as adjusting its colour to show two variables on the map at once, relative to each other.

Chris

In the histogram tool, I would like the ability to specify the bins, not just the number of bins, but the values of the bins. That would be especially helpful when comparing different data sets when I want to see an apples to apples comparison across two different histograms. 

Issue: When I use any of the Multi-Field Formula tool, I lose the variable names in the field description. This is a problem when I'm working with demographic data because the name of the variable is often something like PCT0010005. The user friendly name is in the field description metadata.

Solution: Please have the Multi-Field Formula tool behave as the Formula tool does by persisting the field Description values.

Thanks!

John Hollingsworth

Would it be possible to have Calgary index files saved to a sub folder so they don't reside in the same folder where the cydb is located? All these indices just clutter up the folder. Thanks,

Simon

When creating an Annalytic App, in the Actions tab, when creating an action, have the window display the actions in numerical order.  

I have records of with several address fields per store: address 1, address 2, address 3.(e.g. po box 123, 456 main st, suite 600).
I geocode each address field in different iterations, but I want my final input to contain the best geocoding level. e.g. Actual before Zip9. 
Can we rank the geocoding levels like this below? Then it will be easier to filter out the best geocoding level.

It would be very useful to have a new Grid selection question type. This would allow you to see a grid of data that you can sort and pan through and make selections. Similar to a multi select but in grid form with multiple columns.

When manually configuring a Union tool within a module/app, once it's saved, if you go in at any point in the future, and change anything upstream from the Union Tool, it causes an error "[some field name] has been changed and the Union Tool needs to be reconfigured".

This happens even if you do not reconfigure any upstream tools, but mearely access them, physically move them, say, an inch to the left or something like that, etc.  Basically if you just "touch" any tool upstream, the Union Tool thinks that the manual config needs to be done over.  But even if you do reconfig the Union Tool (either delete it and bring a new one in, or change the current one to Auto and then back to manual), it STILL does not recognize the tool as being correct.

The only way I have found to correct this issue is to click Play, and let it throw the error.  Add Select Tools before the Union Tool to change the names to be common, then click on the Union Tool, and switch it to auto.  Then click Play again.  This can be very inconvenient if you have a module that takes hours (although you can limit your input records).

My suggestion would be to either disable the manual configuration, or add notes to the Help Files stating to use the manual configuration at your own risk, because once it's set and works at the time of creation, you cannot modify any upstream tools thereafter or else it will break the Union Tool and it cannot be repaired -- only choice is to use the Select Tool as I described above

I would like to work with percentages in a format similar to Excel, where the number remains a double for input, exports, and formula calculations, yet has an option to show the number as a percentage on reports and rendered outputs. 

When developing modules and looking to refactor/improve areas where tools should be placed into a macro (for re-use, or for module cleanliness), it would be nice if I could simply select all the tools that should be in the macro, right click, and have an option to "Create as Macro". The option would create a new module/macro, copy the tools to the canvas, and create the necessary macro inputs and outputs automatically. Additionally, the original module could be updated to replace the selected tools with the newly created macro.

I really like the Tool Container. I also really like to have neat and tidy modules. Sometimes though, the two are in conflict because the Tool Container automatically sizes itself so I end up playing around with tool placement to get my containers the same.

Could you please add the option to make the Tool Container a sizeable object (like the Explorer Box) or give width and height value boxes in the tool properties?

After visiting with a new user who was not sure how to set up a filter, we came up with the following idea.

We would add a "simple" option to the existing Filter tool with some basic controls that would automatically create the expression for you.

Do others think this would be helpful?




Geoff Jones
Alteryx, Inc
Product Manager – User Experience

Currently In tools like the select and join you have the ability to sort the field order by ‘Field’. As I understand if this sorts the fields by ASCII order from the smallest to the largest character that you can display.
 
The English-language ASCII sequence is consistent with the order shown in the following:
blank ! " # $ % & ' ( ) * + , - . /0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 : ; < = > ? @
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z[ ] ˆ_
a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z { } ~
 
I would find it very useful to have the ability to use a dictionary sort in these tools.