Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas

We now have the ability to output to an ESRI File Geodatabase, which is great, but it only allows you to output it to the WGS84 coordinate system.  I would like to have the same functionality to export it to other projections or coordinate systems similar to the ESRI Shapefile or ESRI Personal Geodatabase output tools (we specifically need NAD83 but I'm sure others would like other options as well).

Please enhance the input tool to have a feature you could select to test if the file is there and another to allow the workflow to pause for a definable period if the input file is locked by another user, then retry opening.  The pause time-frame would be definable for N seconds and the number of iterations it would cycle through should be definable so you can limit how many attempts to open a file it would try.

File presence should be something we could use to control workflow processing.  

A use case would be a process that runs periodically and looks to see if a file is there and if so opens and processes it.  But if the file is not there then goes to sleep for a definable period before trying again or simply ends processing of the workflow without attempting to work any downstream tools that might otherwise result in "errors" trying to process a null stream.

An extension of this idea and the use case would be to have a separate tool that could evaluate a condition like a null stream or field content or file not found condition and terminate the process without causing an error indicator, or perhaps be configurable so you could cause an error to occur or choose not to cause an error to occur.

Using this latter idea we have an enhanced input tool that can pass a value downstream or generate a null data stream to the next tool, then this next tool can evaluate a condition, like a filter tool, which may be a null stream or file not found indicator or other condition and terminate processing per the configuration, either without a failure indicated or with a failure indicated, according to the wishes of the user.  I have had times when a file was not there and I just want the workflow to stop without throwing errors, other times I may want it to error out to cause me to investigate, other scenarios or while processing my data goes through a filter or two and the result is no data passes the last filter and downstream tools still run and generally cause a failure as they have no data to act on and I don't want that, it may be perfectly valid that on a Sunday or holiday no data passes the filters.

Having meandered through this I sum up with the ideal being to enhance the input tool to be able to test file presence and pass that info on to another tool that can evaluate that and control the workflow run accordingly, but as a separate tool it could be applied to a wider variety of scenarios and test a broader scope of conditions to decide if to proceed or term the workflow.

This functionality would allow the user to select (through a highlight box, or ctrl+click), only the tools in a workflow they would want to run, and the tools that are not selected would be skipped. The idea is similar to the new "add selected tools to a new tool container", but it would run them instead. 

I know the conventional wisdom it to either put everything you don't want run into a tool container and disable it, or to just copy/paste the tools you want run into a blank workflow. However, for very large workflows, it is very time consuming to disable a dozen or more containers, only to re-enable them shortly afterwards, especially if those containers have to be created to isolate the tools that need to be run. Overall, this would be a quality of life improvement that could save the user some time, especially with large or cumbersome workflows.

Similar to https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Ideas/Custom-Functions-in-AMP/idc-p/845446#M16381, it would be great to have AMP allow for custom C++ functions. Custom XML functions were added in 21.1 for AMP, so custom C++ functions would be the natural next step!

cc: @jdunkerley79 @TonyaS 

With the growing demand for data privacy and security, synthetic data generation is becoming an increasingly popular technique for generating datasets that can be shared without compromising sensitive information especially in the healthcare industry.

While Alteryx provides a range of tools, I believe that a custom tool could help meet the specific needs of a lot of healthcare organizations and customers.

Some potential features of a custom synthetic data generation tool for Alteryx could include:

Integration with other Alteryx tools: The tool could be seamlessly integrated with other Alteryx tools to provide a comprehensive data preparation and analysis platform.

Customizable data generation: Users could set parameters and define rules for generating synthetic data that accurately represents the statistical properties of the original dataset.

Data visualization and exploration: The tool could include features for visualizing and exploring the generated data to help users understand and validate the results.

I believe that a custom synthetic data generation tool could help our organization and customers generate high-quality synthetic datasets for testing, model training, and other purposes.

Scenario:

Upstream tools end in a Summarize Tool that has set of records with the following fields:  EmailAddress, AttachmentUNCPath.  So you get a bunch of recipients with various attachments.  Each recipient can have different attachments, and this will change each time it's run.  In other words, it's fully dynamic.  

If the same recipient has multiple attachments, then it would be nice to group the recipient and just separate the attachments with a semi-colon (or whatever) in the same field.  Essentially creating one record per recipient, and therefore one email per recipient, and having the Email Tool attach each file.  In other words, mbarone@paychex.com gets one email with 5 attachments.  And next week maybe only 3 attachments, and so on.  

Currently the only way I see to accomplish this is with a batch macro.  

Would be infinitely more convenient to just have the Email Tool by default accept multiple attachments in a field as long as they are separated by a semi-colon, much like occurs in the "to" field.

all too often, we build an alteryx flow just to realise that step 8 out of 10 was wrong -so back to the beginning and rerun the entire thing.   this often is tedious if your work requires a big data set.

So there is a workaround, using the Cache Macro which can be downloaded (but this does require quite a bit of fiddling with containers; disabling items; setting flags; etc) - but it would be good to allow the user to "restart from here" like you can with a powerpoint slide deck.    I appreciate that this may be tricky since Alteryx may be flushing data out of memory as it goes along, so it cannot restart from any arbitrary point - but if we put the workflow into a "testing cached mode" to cache data at each step; or allowed users to set particular controls as a breakpoint and cache at these points, that would help immensely.

Thank you

Sean

Having the open / close ( expand / collapse ) button for the tool container in lhe top right corner implies that everytime a big container is expanded, to close it the user has to move the pointer to its new position, which sometimes mean scrolling / zooming out and then zooming in to locate it.

I suggest to locate that button in the top left corner by the side of the enable/disable switch or even a double click mechanism for open/close, which would enable to user to open, see what is inside the container, and close it without moving the mouse to locate the new location of the button.

it would be great if the formula tool could expand the intellisense to the select column box. For example, I could start typing in the select column box and it would widdle down the list of fields down.let's suppose I wanted to update field 79A, I could type in 7 and it might show something like 

7

17

27

37

70

71

79A

79B.

So if I typed in 79 then, it would further reduce it to 

79A

79B

And i could select 79A.

Ok Alteryx, we totally love your product.  And I've got a super quick fix for you.  Why on earth would you Autocomplete the ubiquitous tick mark as "ReadRegistryString(Key, ValueName, DefaultValue='')"

?

I find myself in this situation constantly where, 'dummy' suddenly becomes 'dummyReadRegistryString('HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\SRC\Alteryx\4.1', 'InstallDir')' the moment I strike the enter key.  

Pls help, I don't ask for much.

I've obviously been doing lots of work with APIs for this to be my second idea posted today which relates to an improved based on recent work with APIs, but I also believe this is wider reaching.

I've been using Alteryx now for over 4 years and always assumed implicit behaviour of the select tool, so would add a select tool as best practice into a workflow after input tools to catch any data type issues. However I discovered that only fields where you either change the data type, length or field name result in that behaviour being configured and subsequently ensured. I discovered this as part of API development where I had an input field which was a string e.g. 01777777. Placing a select tool after this shows this is a string data type, however if the input was changed to 11777777 the select tool changes to a numeric data type. Therefore downstream formulas such as concatenating two strings would fail.

The workaround to this is to change the select tool to string:forced, which is fine when you know about it, but I suspect that a large majority of users don't. Plus if you have something like 2022-01-26 which is recognised initially as a string, then the forced option will be string:forced, however if you wanted it to be date:forced you need to add a first select tool to change to date, and a second select tool to change to string:forced.

Therefore my suggestion is to add a checkbox option in the select tool to Force all field types, which would update the xml of the tool and therefore ensure what I currently assume would be implicit behaviour is actually implemented.

Hi there Alteryx team,

When we load data from raw files into a SQL table - we use this pattern in almost every single loader because the "Update, insert if new" functionality is so slow; it cannot take advantage of SSVB; it does not do deletes; and it doesn't check for changes in the data so your history tables get polluted with updates that are not real updates.

This pattern below addresses these concerns as follows:

- You explicitly separate out the inserts by comparing to the current table; and use SSVB on the connection - thereby maximizing the speed

- The ones that don't exist - you delete, and allow the history table to keep the history.

- Finally - the rows that exist in both source and target are checked for data changes and only updated if one or more fields have changed.

Given how commonly we have to do this (on almost EVERY data pipe from files into our database) - could we look at making an Incremental Update tool in Alteryx to make this easier?    This is a common functionality in other ETL platforms, and this would be a great addition to Alteryx.

It would be great if we could set the default size of the window presented to the user upon running an Analytic App. Better yet, the option to also have it be dynamically sized (auto-size to the number of input fields required).

For the Output tool, File Format of Microsoft Excel (*.xlsx) - the non-Legacy one - it doesn't have the "Delete Data & Append" option that the Legacy ad 97-2003 Excel formats have. 

Having the Delete Data & Append for the most recent version of Excel would be very beneficial. Without it, there does not appear to be a way to udpate an existing Excel sheet using an Alteryx workflow while preserving the formatting within the Excel sheet. The option to Overwrite/Drop removes all formatting. 

I have this workflow refreshing an Excel sheet daily, and then am emailing it to a distribution at the end of the workflow. Unfortunately, right now I have to use the 97-2003 format to preserve the formatting of the Excel sheet when it is automatically refreshed and emailed each day. 

Can you please assess adding this option? Thanks!

Hi, I was looking for this but couldn't find a similar idea, so I post a new one. If someone knows about a similar idea, please ask the moderators to mer

CountChars(<String>, <char to count>,<case sensitive>)

Where <char to count> and <case sensitive> are optional parameters.

If <char to count> is not provided, the funtion will return the total character count within the <String>.

If <char to count> is provided, it'll return the number of ocurrences of that character within the <String>.

PS: For those tempted to suggest a workaround, I've been using REGEX_CountMatches() for this. Actually, the focus is to simplify user's experience and workflow performance providing a native function, instead of using REGEX which it's very demmanding on resources.

I find the Run Command tool to be counter-intuitive: rather than supplying a required I/O parameter (in at least one of "Write Source" and/or "Read Results"), I would rather just use a "Block Until Done" approach to 1. write file, 2. issue custom system command, 3. read file.  An even simpler example is the case where I don't need I/O to/from the system command... in that case, I just want to issue the command, nothing more.  But the current tool will require me to specify a dummy file, which is counter-intuitive and also leaves that unnecessary file somewhere.

To fix this up without breaking existing user implementations, the "idea" is:

• Do not require either "Write Source" or "Read Result" ... allow both to be blank.
• Allow (but don't require) any of "Command," "Command Arguments," and "Working Directory" to be dynamically populated from fields in the data streamed into the tool.

So... any existing user implementation should be unnaffected... but these changes would allow users to implement system commands in a more intuitive manner, and even allow for very dynamic system commands based on the workflow.

Thanks!

Hello all,

A few weeks ago Alteryx announced inDB support for GBQ. This is an awesome idea, however to make it run, you should use Oauth2 Authentication means GBQ API should be enabled. As of now, it is possible to use Simba ODBC to connect GBQ. My idea is to enhance the connection/authentication method as we have today with Simba ODBC for Google BigQuery and support inDB. It is not easy to implement by IT considering big organizations, number of GBQ projects and to enable API for each application. By enhancing the functionality with ODBC, this will be an awesome solution.

Thank you for voting

Albert

Hello,

A few years ago, Alteryx was 4 released per year and now it's only 2 per year (in 2023, as of today, only one !!)

The reasons why I would the cadence to be back to quarter release :

-a quarter cadence means waiting less time to profit of the Alteryx new features so more value

-quarter cadence is now an industry standard on data software.

-for partners, the new situation means less customer upgrade opportunities, so less cash but also less contacts with customers.

Best regards,

Simon

Hey there,

The performance profiling option on the "runtime" tab is very helpful to identify bottlenecks on a long-running workflow.   However this is missing (along with the entire "Runtime" tab) if I change this to a macro.

Given that the only way to build relatively complex dependant chain jobs is to wrap them in dummy batch macros (using a macro like a sub-procedure with flow-of-control on the master-canvas) - most of our work is done in Macros - so it would be helpful to be able to performance profile them during testing.