The Product Idea boards have gotten an update to better integrate them within our Product team's idea cycle! However this update does have a few unique behaviors, if you have any questions about them check out our FAQ.

Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas

Share your Designer Desktop product ideas - we're listening!
Submitting an Idea?

Be sure to review our Idea Submission Guidelines for more information!

Submission Guidelines

Featured Ideas

Under the Runtime setting, there is an existing option to "Disable All Tools that Write Output". This is incredibly useful when developing workflows when you don't want to overwrite existing files.

 

But this option doesn't disable all outputs, like Publishing to Tableau! 

 

I suggest adding the option to disable ALL kinds of outputs, uploads, and publishing (except possibly logging and caching).

There needs to be a way to step into macro a which is component of parent workflow for debugging.

 

Currently the only way to achieve to debug these is to capture the inputs to the macro from the parent workflow, and then run the amend inputs on the macro. For iterative / batch macros, there is no option to debug at all. This can be tedious, especially if there are a number of inputs, large amounts of data, or you are have nested macros.

 

There should be an option on the tool representing the macro in the parent workflow to trigger a Debug when running the workflow, this would result in the same behavior when choosing 'Debug' from the interface panel in the macro itself: a new 'debug' workflow is created with the inputs received from the parent workflow.

 

On iterative / batch macros, which iteration / control parameter value the debug will be triggered on should be required. So if a macro returns an error on the 3 iteration, then the user ticks 'Debug' and Iteration = 3. If it doesn't reach the 3rd iteration, then no debug workflow is created.

I use the field name auto-complete feature whenever I can. One issue with it, however, is when there are parentheses in a field name. After auto-completing the field name, Alteryx highlights a portion of the field name after the first parenthesis. This is not ideal as I typically expect the cursor to be at the end of the field name so I may continue to type. In this scenario, unfortunately, I would begin to type over my field name and the expression gets messed up. 

 

For example, as shown below, I begin to type "st" and then hit the tab button to complete the field name in my expression.

Kenda_0-1609951383915.png

 

In this case, because my field name has parentheses in it, however, some of the field name remains highlighted and the cursor does not go to the end of the right bracket, as one would expect.

Kenda_1-1609951450797.png

If I were to continue typing at this point, the highlighted portion of the expression would get erased and replaced. 

 

Field names that do not contain parentheses continue to function correctly as shown below. 

Kenda_2-1609951545766.png

 

Kenda_3-1609951564063.png

 

 

 

 

Similar to the thoughts in this idea, it would be great if the parenthesis matching functionality could be added to the formula tool as well.

Currently, when one uses the Google BigQuery Output tool, the only options are to create a table, or append data to an existing table.  It would be more useful if there was a process to replace all data in the table rather than appending. Having the option to overwrite an existing table in Google BigQuery would be optimal.

Sometimes I need to connect to the data in my Database after doing some filtering and modeling with CTEs. To ensure that the connection runs quicker than by using the regular input tool, I would like to use the in DB tool. But is doesn't working because the in DB input tool doesn't support CTEs. CTEs are helpful for everyday life and it would be terribly tedious to replicate all my SQL logic into Alteryx additionally to what I'm already doing inside the tool. 

I found a lot of people having the same issue, it would be great if we can have that feature added to the tool. 

Please consider implementing a consistent case-sensitive option for all tools and functions.

 

To compare string values, including case-sensitivity:   This post had a good description of the challenge, but the post has been archived:

   https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Discussions/IF-equation-ignoring-case-BUG/m-p/4170...

   For all the time I've used Alteryx, I thought that IF "test" = "TEST" would evaluate to false. Today I realised that isn't the case and I was surprised. I'm very surprised that "equals" performs like it does.

 

A few existing Ideas request case-sensitivity for individual tools:

   Case insensitive option while joining two data sets
   https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Desktop-Ideas/Case-insensitive-option-while-joinin...

 

   Unique tool enhancement - deal with case sensitive data
   https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Desktop-Ideas/Unique-tool-enhancement-deal-with-ca...

 

 

This new Idea requests system-wide consideration for case-sensitivity, for all tools and functions.

 

Current state:

 

These tools and functions are case-sensitive:

  • Tool: Join
  • Tool: Tile
  • Function: FindString
  • Functions: MD5_ASCII, MD5_UNICODE, MD5_UTF8

These tools and functions are NOT case-sensitive:

  • Tool: Unique
  • Function: CompareDictionary

These tools and functions can be either case-sensitive or NOT case-sensitive, depending on the options used:

  • Function: Contains
  • Function: EndsWith
  • Function: StartsWith
  • Functions: REGEX_Match, REGEX_Replace, REGEX_CountMatches

Current Challenges:

   How do we easily identify Lower Case, Upper Case, Mixed Case?

   How do we easily compare strings for equality, using case sensitivity?

 

Request:

   Ensure all tools and functions include an option to ignore or consider Case

   Create new functions for IsUpperCase, IsLowerCase, IsMixedCase

   Create a new function for IsEqual, with an option to ignore or consider Case

 

See attached workflow, which

  • uses REGEX_Match to create 3 new fields: IsUpperCase, IsLowerCase, IsMixedCase
  • creates a field [Flag: Original value IsEqual, case-sensitive], to compare strings for equality, using case sensitivity

 

I know it sounds trivial, but I hate having to do the extra click to get the browse tool to pop out.  Just upgraded from 2020.2 to 2021.3.  Before, you could pop out a browse window in 2 clicks:

2022-03-16 07_31_50-Alteryx Designer x64 - New Workflow1_.png

 

Now you need 3 clicks:

2022-03-16 07_31_37-Clipboard.png

 

Like I said, I know it sounds trivial, but when you do this dozens of times a day, it adds up to a big annoyance. 

 

Anyway, was just wondering if enough others felt the same and if so, hopefully the browser behavior could be pushed back to a 2 click pop out.  

 

Although I must say that I just LOVE the comma inserter.

Alteryx has the ability to connect to data sources using fat clients and ODBC but not JDBC.  If the ability to use JDBC could be added to the product it could remove the need to install fat clients.

I like the new cache option in 2018.3, but I would like it to function a little bit different. Let's say you cache at a certain point and then continue to build after that. If I reach another checkpoint and want to cache, it currently re-runs the entire workflow (ie it ignores my cache upstream and just goes back to the beginning of the workflow); instead, I would rather have it utilize the upstream cache. Personally, caching is usually an iterative effort during development where I keep caching along the way. The current functionality of the cache is not conducive to this. Thanks!

Given the prevalence of XML - it seems that it's worth adding a native XML capability to Alterxy (similar to the discussion with @CharleyMcGee and  @KaneG in the discussion forum).    Currently XML is treated mostly like a big and oddly behaved text field, which really undermines the usefulness of XML in real applications.

 

What I'm thinking is:

- Add in a component, which acts like a join, but what it does is validates an XML file vs. an XSD file so that you can see if your XML file matches the schema definition.   Tremendously useful if you've ever had to hand-craft XML.

- Add in a native data-type for XML (like you have a data-type for Centroids)

- On this XML data type - you can then do interesting things like walk the document object model, or iterate through all children (which fixes the issue of deeply nested XML being such a pain).     This would bring XML parsing into the level of usefulness that programmers in Java & Visual Studio have enjoyed for years

- Finally - an ability to construct XML data files without having to text-hack this.   i.e. something similar to the transpose tool, where for a given node, you can add children etc.

 

These four things would really really assist with getting Alteryx to be able to deal with modern data sets like JSON; XML and even web-page scrubbing.

 

As always - very happy to commit time to helping shape this - please feel free to reach out if that would be useful.

 

Thank you all

Sean

CC: @JoeM@mceleavey@MarqueeCrew@NeilR@Ned@dawid_nawrot@TaraM@GeneR

Given Crew Macro Pack increases Alteryx's capability so much, and is used so pervasively, is there a reason to not include Crew Macro Pack in Alteryx Designer or Alteryx Server by default?

 

Can anyone give a reason why Alteryx wouldn't bundle Crew Macro Pack?

 

If not, can we get Crew Macro Pack bundled into Alteryx and have official support for it?

The only thing I have ever found that Excel can do that Alteryx can't is creating a pivot table that allows the user to drill up and down levels of aggregation by collapsing or expanding levels in the data hierarchy. (like this). 

 

Can you add an interactive table to the new interactive charting tool that can provide this level of functionality? It's embarrassing to have to tell Excel users they can't do this in Alteyrx, and likely leads many of them to stick to Excel--and miss out on all the other great things Alteryx can do.

 

Thank you! 

It would be awesome if there was a cross tab in DB option because right now I have to stream out millions of records to build a cross tab.

Hi all,

 

At present, Alteryx does not support DSN-free connections to Snowflake using the Bulk Connector.    This is a critical functionality for any large company that uses Alteryx - and so I'm hoping that this can be changed in the product in an upcoming release.    As a corollary - every DB connection type has to be able to work without DSNs for any medium or large size server instance - so it's worth extending this to check every DB connection type available in Alteryx.

 

Here are the details:

 

What is DSN-Free?

In order to be able to run our Alteryx canvasses on a multi-node server - we have to avoid using DSNs - so we generally expand connection strings that look like this:

odbc:DSN=DSNSnowFlakeTest;UID=Username;PWD=__EncPwd1__|||NEWTESTDB.PUBLIC.MYTESTTABLE

 

to instead have the fully described connection string like this:
odbc:DRIVER={SnowflakeDSIIDriver};UID=Username;pwd=__EncPwd1__;authenticator=Snowflake;WAREHOUSE=compute_wh;SERVER=xnb27844.us-east-1.snowflakecomputing.com;SCHEMA=PUBLIC;DATABASE=NewTestDB;Staging=local;Method=user

 

For Snowflake BL:

Now - for the Snowflake Bulk Loader the same process does not work and Alteryx gives the classic error below

 

With DSN:

snowbl:DSN=DSNSnowFlakeTest;UID=Username;pwd=__EncPwd1__;Staging=local;Method=user|||NEWTESTDB.PUBLIC.MYTESTTABLE

 

Without DSN:

snowbl:driver=SnowflakeDSIIDriver;UID=SeanBAdamsJPMC;pwd=__EncPwd1__;SERVER=xnb27844.us-east-1.snowflakecomputing.com;WAREHOUSE=compute_wh;SCHEMA=PUBLIC;DATABASE=NewTestDB;Staging=local;Method=user|||NEWTESTDB.PUBLIC.MYTESTTABLE

 

Output Data (6) Error SQLDriverConnect: [Microsoft][ODBC Driver Manager] Data source name not found and no default driver specified" which indicates that the driver details may be wrong

 

 

Many thanks

Sean

Most databases treat null as "unknown" and as a result, null fails all comparisons in SQL.    For example, null does not match to null in a join, null will fail any > or < tests etc.    This is an ANSI and ISO standard behaviour.

 

Alteryx treats null differently - if you have 2 data sets going into a join, then a row with value null will match to a row with value null.

 

We've seen this creating confusion with our users who are becoming more fluent with SQL and who are using inDB tools - where the query layer treats null differently than the Alteryx layer.

 

Could we add a setting flag to Alteryx so that users can turn on ISO / ANSI standard processing of Null so that data works the same at all levels of the query stack?

 

Many thanks

Sean

I find the myself often needing to create unique IDs for a given category. Currently I end up using the multi row tool and leveraging the "group by" option. Enabling the record ID tool to create a unique count by grouping on distinct categories in an underlying data set would unlock an new level of grouping that would consolidate record keeping functionality in a single tool.

Please add xlsx files within the onedrive input/output tool

The more python and R development I do the more I want to use the shortcutes [CTRL] + [ENTER] to run my workflow,

 

Is it possible to add this as a second way to run the workflow? 

 

I'm thinking its going to have to have a new shortcut anyways with cloud as [CTRL] + [R] would refresh the page! :D

 

Asking for a friend :D

When using an OUTPUT tool, you can currently only output to one (1) format.  My idea is to allow for a checkbox to create a YXDB file format when you output to another format.  In many instances a copy of the CSV data in YXDB file format is needed.  Creating another output requires another tool with nearly identical information.  This is my backup copy to what I sent the customer is an example.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

Top Liked Authors