Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas

hi team,

Currently the join tool doesn't have option to join the data irrespective of its case sensitivity. this causes issues while doing the analysis.

This tool is widely being taking as a replacement of Excel Vlookup formula (which is also case insensitive),so can we have the similar functionality for Join tool also?

We can have an option like a radio button or checkbox to select if we want to have case insensitivity while joining.

Thanks

Hello All,

I'm using the dynamic input tool for SQL requests in my Workflow (WF).

I'm using the "Replace a Specific String" to replace elements in the SQL statement dynamically depeding on results of prevoius tools, user input etc.

So the statement looks like

select * from Schema_Name_xx where invoice_number = 'invoice_number_xx'

Since Schema_Name_xx is no valid Schema in the Database, the statement (= Validation) won't work. Only if I replace Schema_Name_xx by e.g. Invoice_Data_Current it will work, same with the invoice number, invoice_number_xx is replaced by e.g. 4711.

Therefore, validation makes no sense and will never work, only if the WF is running, the correct Schema is inserted in the SQL statement by the "Replace a Specific String" function.

It would be great to disable it in the users settings or wherever in the Designer, changing a config file would also be great :-)

Pls. note: I'm thinking (since I'm not allowed anyway ;-)) about changing/disabeling anything in the Alteryx Server settings.

Reason:

1. Speed: Validating a WF with SQL statements that don't work takes time (every time I save it), sometimes I get even a timeout...

2. WF error entries: Each upload with a  failed validation creates an entry in the WF result list which makes it harder to seperate them from the "real" WF errors...

Thanks & Best Regards,

Thomas

In some cases, the information about incoming columns to tools are (temporarily) forgotten, e.g. if Autoconfig is switched off, if the incoming connection is temporarily missing, or if column names are generated dynamically and the workflow has not been executed, yet.

Many tools deal with that situation well, e.g. Selection, Formula, or Summarize. In these cases, the tools tell the user that they cannot find incoming columns, but they preserve the configuration so that the user still can (at least partially) work on these tools and important information on the configuration is not lost:

Example Select Tool

1. First step: Connections present, configuration typed in:
   
2. Second step: Connection cut, confguration opened. The configuration looks screwed up but implicitly contains all settings:
   
3. Third step: Connection re-connected. The configuration is as before:
   

Other tools behave the opposite, for example Unique or Macro Input (an for sure many other tools). If the incoming columns are currently unknown to the Designer and you click once on the symbol, the entire configuration of this tool is lost. You might try to get the configuration back by pressing undo. This, in most cases does not work. Or, even worse, you find out what happened later when it's too late for undo. In this case, you either have an old version of that workflow to look up the configuration or you have to re-develop it. In any case, this is unnecessary and time-consuming software behaviour.

Example Unique Tool

1. Step 1: Connections present, configuration typed in:
    
2. Step 2: Connection cut, confguration opened. The configuration is empty:
   
3. Step 3: Connection re-connected: The entire configuration is permanently lost:
   

I wasn't sure whether I should report this as a bug or a feature enhancement. It is somehow in between. Two aspects tell me that this should be changed:

• Inconsistent behaviour of different tools for now reason,
• Easy loss of programming work, resulting in time-consuming bug fixing.

Please make sure that all tools preserve their configuration also if information on incoming columns is temporarily lost.

Containers are a great feature.  They allow us to create larger workflows in smaller canvases, and manage the flow and appearance of our work.  However the design whether intentional or flawed that allows the container window to interact with the layers behind it is annoying.  Connection wires should not redirect within a container because of things on the canvas behind the container.  Likewise if I have a container open, I should not be able to grab a tool or container behind the open container through the container canvas.  Please fix this flaw.

Alteryx gods,

It would make me even happier than I am now if it were possible to tailor the completion messaging in the Interface Designer when an analytic app completes.

Currently, we use rendering etc, but sometimes we simply want to be able to create a bespoke completion message.

My example is as follows:

In the app you have the option to download files, or have them emailed to you. If you choose download, the final display is the render tool with the documents listed, however, if you choose email I want nothing to show but the final window with the message "Please check your email" or something. There may be more than one option, and so being able to dynamically change these messages would be very useful.

Help me Alteryx gods, you're my only hope.

*beep boop boop*

I am trying to add additional functionality to my existing workflow.

We have a common workflow pushed to the Alteryx server and there will be multiple people running this workflow.

Every time the workflow is run, the expectation is that an automatic email should be sent to the person who has triggered it(and won't be sent to multiple other people).

Currently, we have it set up using the Email tool but I do not see an option to dynamically update this “To” field to automatically use the email of a person running the workflow on the server.

As mentioned in detail here, I think that the addition of a "run as metadata" feature could be very helpful for making the analytic apps more dynamic in addition to enabling the dynamic configuration of the tools included in analytic apps chained together in a single workflow using control containers, therefore mostly eliminating the need to chain multiple YXWZ files together to be able to utilize the previous analytic app's output (this of course doesn't include the cases where a complex WF/App would have to be built by the previous app in chain to switch to it, but Runner helps solve this issue to a certain extent provided you don't have to provide any parameters/values to the generated WF/App).

The addition of this feature would be somewhat similar to running an app with its outputs disabled, without having to run the entire app itself, but rather only certain parts specified by the user in a limited manner. Clicking the Refresh Metadata button (which will be active only if there is at least one metadata tool in the workflow) will update the data seen in the app interface (such as Drop Down lists, List Boxes etc.), provided the user selected the up-to-date input file(s) (or the data in a database is up-to-date) where the data will be obtained from.

To explain in detail with a use case, suppose you have two flows added to separate Control Containers where the second CC uses the field info of a file used in the first CC to enable the user to select a field from a drop down list to apply a formula (such as parsing a text using RegEx) for example. After specifying the necessary branch in the first CC where the field info is obtained, the user could select these tools and then Right Click => Convert to Metadata Tool to select which tools will run when the user clicks on the Refresh Metadata button. The metadata tools could of course be specified across the entirety of the workflow (multiple Control Containers) to update the metadata for all Control Containers and therefore all tabs of a "concatenated app", where multiple apps are contained in a single workflow.

With this feature, all tools that are configured as metadata tools (excluding the tools that have no configuration) will be able to be configured as a "metadata only" tool or a "hybrid" tool, meaning a hybrid tool will be able to be configured separately for its both behaviours (being able to change all configurations for a tool without any restrictions in each mode, MetaInfo would dynamically update while refreshing metadata). Metadata only configuration of a tool could be left the same as the workflow only configuration if desired.

For example an Input File marked as a hybrid tool could be configured to read all records for its workflow tool mode and only 1 record for its metadata tool mode. This could be made possible with the addition of a new tab named Metadata Tool Configuration in addition to the already existing Configuration tab, and a MDToolConfig XML tree could be added to reflect these configurations to the XML of the tool in question, separate from the Configuration XML tree, and either one of those XML trees or both of them would be present depending on the nature of the tool chosen by the user (workflow tool, metadata tool or hybrid).

This would also mean that all the metadata tool configurations of a tool could optionally be updated using Interface tools. You could for example either update the input file to be read for both the workflow tool mode and metadata mode of an input tool at once, or specify separate input files using different interface tools. As another example, the amount of records to be read by a Sample tool could be specified by a Numeric Up/Down tool but the metadata tool configuration could be left as First 1 rows, without being able to change it from the App Interface.

Hybrid tool (note how Configuration and MDToolConfig has different RecordLimit settings):

    <Node ToolID="1">
      <GuiSettings Plugin="AlteryxBasePluginsGui.DbFileInput.DbFileInput">
        <Position x="102" y="258" />
      </GuiSettings>
      <Properties>
        <Configuration>
          <Passwords />
          <File OutputFileName="" RecordLimit="" SearchSubDirs="False" FileFormat="25">C:\Users\PC\Desktop\SampleFile.xlsx|||`Sheet1$`</File>
          <FormatSpecificOptions>
            <FirstRowData>False</FirstRowData>
            <ImportLine>1</ImportLine>
          </FormatSpecificOptions>
        </Configuration>
        <MDToolConfig>
          <Passwords />
          <File OutputFileName="" RecordLimit="1" SearchSubDirs="False" FileFormat="25">C:\Users\PC\Desktop\SampleFile.xlsx|||`Sheet1$`</File>
          <FormatSpecificOptions>
            <FirstRowData>False</FirstRowData>
            <ImportLine>1</ImportLine>
          </FormatSpecificOptions>
        </MDToolConfig>
        <Annotation DisplayMode="0">
          <Name />
          <DefaultAnnotationText>SampleFile.xlsx
Query=`Sheet1$`</DefaultAnnotationText>
          <Left value="False" />
        </Annotation>
        <Dependencies>
          <Implicit />
        </Dependencies>
        <MetaInfo connection="Output">
          <RecordInfo />
        </MetaInfo>
      </Properties>
      <EngineSettings EngineDll="AlteryxBasePluginsEngine.dll" EngineDllEntryPoint="AlteryxDbFileInput" />
    </Node>

Please also note that this idea differs from another idea I posted (link above) named Dynamic Tool Configuration Change While the Workflow is Running in that the configuration is updated while the WF/App is actually running and for example the Text to Columns tool in the second CC is dynamically changed using the output of a tool in the first CC, unlike selecting an input file and clicking Refresh Metadata from the App Interface before the workflow is run.

Attached is a screenshot and an analytic app to better demonstrate the idea.

Thanks for reading.

Hello, I believe this feature will be useful for many people.
The idea is to select multiple instances of the same tool and the configuration that we set will be applied to all the selected tools. Furthermore, it will be useful to be an easy way to select all instances of the same tool across a workflow with a shortcut in order to edit them more easily.

I would like a new format option within the Designer function DateTimeFormat such that where a date is held in the database

e.g. 2023-01-01

DateTimeFormat([date],%o)

will return 1st not 1 or 01. 

Workarounds exist, but are fiddly given the different options....1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th.....

Not sure if API/SDK is the appropriate portion of the product that this enhancement would pertain to, but I thought that it was the most fitting option available.

I understand this is a long shot and would probably never happen, but I think it would be super cool if Alteryx had tools for blockchain development and web3 interaction.

The blockchain space is a complicated space, and every blockchain is a little bit different. So I am not sure exactly sure what this would even look like. But I imagine tools like connect wallet, query events, write transactions or other common blockchain actions.

I think as the blockchain space continues to grow, there is going to be an continued increase in interest in developing blockchain applications including companies that want to use blockchain.

With the state the blockchain industry is in at the moment, I am sure most people reading this would think its crazy, but if the blockchain industry does prevail in the long term, which I think it will, this could definitely be something to keep on the radar.

Think big!

I am suggesting an addition to the Auto Field Tool.  Create an option that allows only auto sizing of the fields and does not change the field type.  A check box that says Auto Size Only.  The tool would recognize any fields that can be resized based on their incoming data field type and will not change the data type.  The resizing function is very helpful to maximize workflow performance, but I currently do not use it much because it guesses wrong on the data types.  This causes problems also when data inputs change.  Whereas setting to auto size only, it can streamline the data but let the user be confident the data types would not change. 

Thank You

I have tried to search for this Idea but not located one that is same or similar. 

When searching for tools to use rather than having to click in the search bar at the top, it would be nice just to click on a blank part of the canvas and start typing for the tool that you need, then a suggest tool list pops up and you just click on the one you want to it appear. 

Thanks

To embed the "Not ok" filter option in the browse tool

As of version 2023.1 once a workflow is locked, it cannot be unlocked. If Alteryx can unlock it, can it be made into a user option?

My idea has two parts. See the images for examples.

1. Add an option on the lock screen so the user can get an unlock passkey.

Passkey is either generated by Alteryx or set by user

2. Change the behavior when trying to open a locked file by giving the user an option to enter the unlock passkey.

Same behavior if there is no passkey

Dialog box with passkey input and cancel button if a passkey exists

This would be useful as a way to revise or edit a workflow or update the expiration date on the existing workflow without having to reload or resave a new file.

Looking for a tool to replicate the Goal seek functionality built into Excel.

Seems it could be solved by using R or iterative macros however a tool would make life much easier,

Dynamic macros that fetch the current version at every run time vs storing a static copy of the macro with the workflow at publish time are challenging to pull off using shared drives. 

This suggestion is to store dynamic macros in the gallery and secure their use with collections.

Changing the Macro Input tool in an existing macro is dangerous and can result in unmapped fields or lost connections in workflows using the macro. For example, we have a widely used macro for which we'd like to change the name of an input field, change it's default type from Date to DateTime, make it optional while keeping other fields mandatory. Currently, we cannot find a solution which would not require us to fix each workflow using the macro after changing it. We should be able to change the field names, field types (e.g. String to V_WString, Date to DateTime), select optional fields and do other modifications to Macro Input without having to update each workflow using the macro. The new Macro Input UI could be enhanced with a window similar to that of Select tool's. Technically, the Macro Input fields could have a unique ID by which they would be recognised in workflows, so the field names would just be aliases that could be changed without losing the mapping. In summary, we are restricted to our initial setup of Macro Input and it is very complicated to change it afterwards, especially if the macro is used widely.

Right click + "Insert After" and Right click + "Paste After" should behave the same. In the picture below I show the two cases. Currently, the "Insert After" option inserts a tool between the selected tool and the tools after it. The "Paste After" creates a new branch with the pasted tool. I think the "Paste After" should behave the same as the "Insert After": paste the tool on the existing branches. In case we want to create a new branch, we will paste the tool and connect a new branch to it.

I am aware that an Auto-Documenter tool is available in the Gallery, but that has not been maintained since 2020. 

It would be great if Alteryx could have that as an added feature to the Designer as an option for end-users to utilize. 

The breakdown of it can be done via XML parsing as such: 

<Nodes>: Configuration of tools

<Connections>: The tools used

<Properties>: Workflow properties

Right now, the current workaround is for users to export their XML, and the internal Alteryx development team has to build another workflow that reads the XML accordingly + parses it to fit what is needed. 

It would be better for Alteryx to build something more robust, and perhaps even include some elements of AiDIN which they are promoting now.