Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas

Hello!

I had found this quirk whilst working on a fairly large workflow, where i had multiple tools cached to keep things quick. I had moved one of the tools on the canvas to a pre-existing container, and it removed the caching on my whole workflow.

Steps to reproduce:

1) setup a super basic workflow (or any workflow):

2) Cache part of the workflow:

3) drag one of the tools (in this case the formula) into the container:

As you can see, the workflow is no longer cached and i have to re-cache it.

This would be a welcome change as that is an unexpected behaviour to me, and so I would imagine others too. A workflow no longer being cached can cost the developer a lot of time (and potential resource, if hitting a Snowflake instance, for example). 

Thanks,
TheOC

Once I've built a workflow I often have to go through the process of removing and combining tools such as selects and formula tools which could be simplified to just one tool. It would be great to have an automated feature which could detect groups of tools which could be simplified and then automatically combined them into one step, improving/simplifying my workflow.  

If the workflow configuration had a run for 'x' number of iterations option it would make debugging macros a lot easier. My current method consists of copying results, changing inputs and repeat until I find my problem which feels very manual. 

Hello,

I see no reason why Insight is deactivated by default... it would be so smarter to make it active. That's all, 5 minutes of a developer.

Best regards,

Simon

When I am working with 2 different versions of Alteryx (e.g., a current version and a beta version), I set different background colors for each version through user settings. This a great because I don't want to accidentally modify a current workflow when beta testing; the canvas color is a clear, but subtle indicator of which version I'm working in. 

Similarly, I'd like the option to set a custom canvas color for each workflow. Use case - I have two versions of a workflow, e.g., one production and one in development, both in the same version of Alteryx. I don't want to accidentally modify the production workflow instead of the dev workflow. My current workarounds are to open the workflow in two different windows on separate monitors or to add an obtrusive comment box making the dev version as in development. Neither is a great option. If I could set the canvas for the workflows to different colors, that would reduce the possibility of making this mistake.

My idea is to expand this the custom canvas-coloring functionality to allow users to set a custom canvas color for each workflow. 

This is not exactly a new feature but I didn't know where else to send it.
I just received an email from Alteryx and I noticed that the footer is an image and not dynamic.

And there you see that the year is still 2021. A good idea would be to insert a code that would grab the year automatically from the actual date.

Hello all,

As of today, Alteryx proposes the Intelligence Suite with amazing tools never seen in a data tool, even OCR, image analysis etc.. https://www.alteryx.com/fr/products/intelligence-suite

But... these wonderful tools are part of a paid add-on. And this is what is problematic :

-Alteryx is already an expensive tool. With a huge value but honestly expensive.

-The tools in Intelligence Suite are not common in data tools because you won't use often. And paying for tools you use once or twice in a month is not easy to justify.

So, I suggest to incorpore Intelligence Suite in the core product. The Alteryx users benefit is evident so let's see the Alteryx benefits : 
-more user satisfaction
-a simpler catalog
-adding a lot of value to Designer, with the ability to communicate widely on the topic.

-almost no cost : most costumers won't buy the Intelligence Suite anyway.

Best regards,

Simon

It would be helpful if we could open 2 or more workflows at the same time from a gallery connection. Sometimes they are related or part of an overall update process, so opening all of them at the same time would save many clicks and a lot of time. 

It would be nice to have a seed input for the Random % Sample tool. The edited picture above is what it might look like. One input is the seed value, and another input is the data. 

Prezados, boa tarde. Espero que estejam todos bem.

A sugestão acredito eu pode ser aplicada tanto na ferramenta de entrada de dados, quanto na ferramenta de texto para colunas.

Existem colunas com campos de texto aberto e que são cadastrados por áreas internas aqui da empresa. Já tentamos alinhar para que esses caracteres, que muitas das vezes são usadas como delimitadores, não sejam usados nesses campos. Porém achei melhor buscar uma solução nesse sentido, para evitar qualquer erro nesse sentido.

A proposta é ser possível isolar essa coluna que existem esses caracteres especiais, para que não sejam interpretadas como delimitadores pelo alteryx, fazendo pular colunas e desalinhando o relatório todo.

Obrigado e abraços

Thiago Tanaka

Prezados boa tarde. Espero que estejam bem.

Minha ideia/sugestão vem para aprimoramento da ferramenta "Texto para Colunas"  (Parse), onde podemos delimitar colunas com caracteres de delimitação.

Atualmente, a delimitação não ocorre pro cabeçalho, tendo que ser necessário outros meios para considerar o cabeçalho como uma linha comum, para depois torná-lo como cabelho, ou tratar somente o cabeçalho de forma separada.

Seria interessante que a propria ferramenta de texto para coluna já desse a opção de delimitar a coluna de cabeçalho da mesma forma.

Obrigado e abraços

Thiago Tanaka

Prezados espero que estejam bem.

Gostaria de sugerir um aprimoramento para os erros comuns de conhecimento do Alteryx.

Quando rodamos o fluxo de trabalho e ao final algum erro é sinalizado no histórico, normalmente, não é possível entender ao certo o que precisa ser corrigido para sanar o problema.

A susgestão está em transformar o erro que é sinalizado no histórico, em link para que a pessoa clique no erro e seja direcionado para alguma documentação dentro do forum ou documentação, e que facilite a solução do problema para o usuário. Algo parecido com o que ocorre com os exemplos que existem da possibilidade de uso das ferramentas.

Obrigado e abraços

Thiago Tanaka

The Basic Data Profile tool cannot handle files larger than about 40 MB and 33 fields.  When I add the 34th field, and the file size stays at 40 MB (Browse tool rounding), it breaks.

I'm trying to get the count of non-nulls for the  "Empl Current" field.  Adding the 34th field drops the non-null count down from the correct 25,894 to 26, and if I add more fields, the count of non-nulls drops to zero.

The Basic Data Profile tool is configured with a 10 million limit on exact count and 100,000 limit on unique values.

The whole point of the BDP tool is to get one's hands around large data files that are too big to manually inspect, so this tiny limit is really a problem.

Please consider adding a new setting to the Render Tool, so the users can select or deselect if an existing File should be overwritten (Otherwise throw an error, like the Output Data Tool does, when configured to create a new Sheet and that Sheet already exists)

Most people who have been around for more than one version change of Alteryx will be familiar with the standard dreaded error pop-up box:

"There was an error opening [workflow X]. This workflow was created by a more recent version of Alteryx..."

The pop up box is generated as many times as there are assets potentially affected. You click once to acknowledge you're aware there is a problem with asset 1A, then you click again when the 1B pop up appears, then you keep clicking until you reach W76. Or that's what the software expects you to do and seem to figure is the graceful way to handle potential problems associated with missing assets (it's far from certain there are even any problems with running the specific code referred to on the older version, this is a warning-level notification where stuff might not work which has been 'promoted' to a full-fledged error that you are requested to address at the asset level). 

If you work somewhere where there is a large community of Alteryx users sharing assets widely with each other (all making use of large shared macro repositories) the software's choice of notifying you at the asset level is, not to mince words, completely insane. You could do everything right, have exactly the recommended version from the perspective of Alteryx sys-management, the one that corresponds to the corporate server version executing the scheduled workflows, and still be bombarded with 15 notifications at start-up if you're away for a few days and in the time you were away one or two new guys at the (very large) company decided to create a few new assets with the latest version of the software and share them with their colleagues (the latest version was not yet implemented server-side, so some of those tools might fail for those users - but the tools become everybody's problem the second they're stored in the shared location).

The notifications at startup make no distinction between relevant and irrelevant messages, you can start an empty new workflow and still get messages related to macros you don't care about, because they're located somewhere where Alteryx has been told to look for them even if they're not loaded/included in the workflow.

Every single asset Alteryx might in theory make use of during the session that is starting up will spark an individual message that cannot be ignored or skipped without acknowledging its existence, even if many of the assets will work just fine with an older version. This setup scales ...badly.

I can think of at least two solutions which would in many ways be preferable to the current structure. One would be to 'batch' the notifications prior to creating the pop-up box (one pop-up per start-up, not per asset). What might be included in such a pop-up could for instance be a grouped output with the Alteryx versions that did not match the active version ('workflows developed in version 'XX56' and 'XX57' were identified and these may fail to load', or whatever). Another option would be to have a setting in Designer where you tell Alteryx you don't want to see these notifications at start-up.

I often have to cache my workflow at certain points to do further development/analysis since the run time is so long. I can't express how frustrating it is when i need to edit a formula tool that's like 2 tools behind the cache but the whole entire cache is lost when i have to edit it. why can't the cache be kept up until the tool that was edited??

Business problem

Alteryx's block until done tool is a terrific way to sort which records go to which stream first.  However, during the last couple of years my team has experienced several times where there are gaps in functionality.  For example, we output data into a relational database (SQL Server) with foreign key constraints.  In this manner, one output tool must be completed (the dimension tables) before the others (fact tables) to properly load data.  Block until done doesn't always work in these cases, and our team has frequently relied on using chained apps or other clunky workarounds.  This creates unnecessary complexity for a simple problem.

A potential solution

Allow an optional setting in the output tool that waits for another tool in the same workflow to complete first.

Performance profiles work at the tool level. When I want to evaluate the performance of a group of tools, I have to click on them one at a time, log the performance, and calculate manually. I want to be able to click on a container full of tools or lasso some myself and view the granular and subtotaled performance profile.

Our company requires a password change every 3 months, which wreaks havoc bc i have to manually change each workflows input data connection configuration every time this happens to put in my latest credentials. Not the most efficient process for all the automated workflows I have on the gallery.

Instead, it would be great if alteryx could load in usernames and passwords via a field from the workflow. This way, I could just update the one excel file with two fields for username and password and every workflow referencing it with an input data connection would automatically pass on the new credentials every 3 months, not disturbing any of my autoscheduled workflows.