Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas

Alteryx offers the ability to add new formulae (e.g. the Abacus addin) and new tools (e.g. the marketplace; custom macros etc) - which is a very valuable and valued way to extend the capability of the platform.

However - if you add a new function or tool that has the same name as an existing function / tool - this can lead to a confusing user experience (a namespace conflict)

Would it be possible to add capability to Alteryx to help work around this - two potential vectors are listed below:

- Check for name conflicts when loading tools or when loading Alteryx - and warn the user.   e.g. "The Coalesce function in package CORE Alteryx conflicts with the same function name in XXX package - this may cause mysterious behaviours"

- Potentially allow prefixes to address a function if there are same names - e.g. CoreAlteryx.Coalesce or Abacus.Coalesce - and if there is a function used in a function tool in a way that is ambiguous (e.g. "Coalesce") then give the user a simple dialog that allows them to pick which one they meant, and then Alteryx can self-cleanup.

cc: @JarrodT  @NicoleJ 

Not sure I'd call this a user setting, but I couldn't figure out the right heading this belongs to. 

When opening files, there are often times a couple of files at that aren't run on any kind of schedule or set time frame but you come back to when you need to run them.  

There should be a way to set "FAVORITES" for a handful of files that you find yourself referring to on a repeated basis, but too far back to be on the 'recents' list because you open too many other files. 

If the tables in the config window has lots of rows, it is quite complicated to find those of interest. 

Please add a filter or search option (e.g. by the field name) to display only the relevant rows.

It would also be helpful to select or deselect multiple selected rows with one click.

Find an example from the "Select-Tool":

Hello all,

According to wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Materialized_view

 In computing, a materialized view is a database object that contains the results of a query. For example, it may be a local copy of data located remotely, or may be a subset of the rows and/or columns of a table or join result, or may be a summary using an aggregate function.

The process of setting up a materialized view is sometimes called materialization.[1] This is a form of caching the results of a query, similar to memoization of the value of a function in functional languages, and it is sometimes described as a form of precomputation.[2][3] As with other forms of precomputation, database users typically use materialized views for performance reasons, i.e. as a form of optimization.

So, I would like to create that in Alteryx, for obvious performance reasons in some use cases.

This is not a duplicate of https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Desktop-Ideas/In-DB-Create-View/idi-p/157886

Best regards,

Simon

Problem statement - 

Currently we are storing our Alteryx data in .yxdb file format and whenever we want to fetch the data, the whole dataset first load into the memory and then we can able to apply filter tool afterwards to get the required subset of data from .yxdb which is completely waste of time and resources.

Solution - 

My idea is to introduce a YXDB SQL statement tool which can directly apply in a workflow to get the required dataset from .YXDB file, I hope this will reduce the overall runtime of workflow and user will get desired data in record time which improves the performance and reduce the memory consumption.

Today, there is an checkbox to "Disable All Tools that Write Output" within the Runtime settings for a workflow.  Setting this option requires at least 3 clicks:

• Click on the canvas
• Click the "Runtime" tab in the Configuration pane
• Click the checkbox

Could a keyboard shortcut be added for this?  I've spoken to several users who leverage this feature and, while it is already a time saver, it seems helpful enough where a keyboard shortcut is warranted.

I dont know if it is asking too much, but here it is 😅

A lot of times when i develop Analytic Apps for business users, they ask me if they can run the app locally without Alteryx Designer installed. For business users it seems to make sense that the developer need to have Alteryx Designer licensed and installed, but also that after the app is developed, it would make sense and be great to be able to be able to run it without Alteryx Designer installed. And i agree with them!

I know that using the Server is the way to go in these situations, but not every company has this possibility. So, the idea is to have some non paid way to let business users from a company that already have Alteryx Designer licenses to be able to run just Analytic Apps locally, without Alteryx Designer installed on their local machines/and if the company does not have Alteryx Server yet.

Here are some previous discussions corroborating with this doubt/necessity:

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Discussions/Analytic-Apps-for-a-Nonuser/td-p/78152...

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Discussions/App-Design-for-External-Users/td-p/340...

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Discussions/Best-way-to-share-Alteryx-workflow-wit...

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Discussions/How-can-I-share-a-workflow-to-a-non-Al...

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/General-Discussions/Where-to-save-an-analytics-app-for-non-alteryx-...

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Discussions/Does-everybody-that-use-my-Alteryx-App...

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Discussions/Running-a-workflow-locally-via-develop...

Thanks!

Hello!

I am just making a quick suggestion, specifically for the Formula tool within Alteryx.

Often when I am working on a larger workflow - I will end up optimising the workflow towards the end. I typically end up removing unnecessary tools, fields, and rethinking my logic.

Much of this optimisation, is also merging formula tools where possible. For instance, if I have 3 formulas - its much cleaner (and I would suspect faster) to have these all within one tool. For instance, a scaled down example:

to this:

This requires a lot of copy and paste - especially if the formulas/column names are long - this can be two copy and pastes, and waiting for tools to load between them, per formula (i do appreciate, this sounds an incredibly small problem to have, but on what I would consider a large workflow, a tool loading can actually take a couple of seconds - and this could burn some time. Additionally, there's always potential problems when it comes to copy/pasting or retyping with errors).

My proposed solution to this, is the ability to drag a formula onto another - very similar to dragging a tool onto a connection. This integration would look like:

Drag to the first formula:

Release:

Formula has been appended to the formula tool:

I think this will help people visually optimise their workflows!

Cheers,
TheOC

Lots of use cases involve concatenating some values based on group by clauses within the Summarize tool.

It will be great to have the option to Concatenate Unique as an aggregation method, so the results will have just one appearance for each value in the results.

Plus, having the option to get the chance to have them sorted or not will be awesome.

hello,

version 2021.4 does not allow workflows to run if any of their input files are open.... would be great to have an option for the input tool that switches on/off the ability to read from open files. Some of my input files have frequent data changes and i tend to keep them open while testing/simulating results

Thank you,

abdou 

Hello all,

According to wikipedia :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embedded_database

An embedded database system is a database management system (DBMS) which is tightly integrated with an application software; it is embedded in the application.

It's often like a single file/dll that you can use inside an application without the user having to connect (or at least to configure it) to it (it's all done inside the application). So, it's widely portable.


Why it does matter ?

As of today, there is not a single example of in database workflow because all the supported databases need the user to:

1/install an odbc driver (most of time, he won't have the rights to do so)

2/configure an odbc connection (sometimes, he doesn't have the rights to)

3/configure a connection on Alteryx (ok, he can)
So it requires IT action, which can be pretty long (in ùany organization, it requires several weeks !!). And even with all of that,the users must be granted privilege to access database and the customer need to develop its own examples and write its own specific documentation.

Well, this is not efficient.

What I suggest is Alteryx to use one of embedded database for training support/one tool examples. SQLlite seems good, maybe a more analytics oriented (like DuckDB ) would be more efficient.
The requirement are, I think, the following :
-OpenSource and free
-Fast
-SQL compliant
-With a bulk load ability

Best regards,

Simon

I can't even count how often I looked at an Excel, CSV or even YXDB file, where I KNEW that it was generated by Alteryx, but I couldn't remember the workflow. Currently, I have to simply go through all workflows I ever build and see if I can find it.

Theoretically, I could use a text-search across all workflows and see if I can find the output names - problem here: Most of my output filenames are generated dynamically on the run.

It would be amazing if Alteryx could simply write the Workflow name (maybe even path) into the metadata of a file.

(Screenshot from Google, as my os is set to German) 

How about, we write "This file was created with by "Create Controlling Reports.yxmd on 2023-02-06 with Alteryx Designer 2021.4.298434" in the field 'Comments'?

This would make it extremely easy to find what workflow the file generated. I think it would be an option to talk about "filepath" instead of filename, but the filepath could include the local machine name, which might include GDPR information.

@Community: Is there any additional information that you'd like to see in the metadata?

Best

Alex

Hello all,

I'm currently learning Pythin language and there is this cool feature : you can multiply a string

Pretty cool, no? I would like the same syntax to work for Tableau.

Best regards,

Simon

When making any type of macro, it's important to test the functionality of the macro via a debug.  This is accomplished successfully with normal tools, however there's a bug that will not allow the user to debug In-DB macros that use either of the following standard Alteryx tools:  

• Macro Input In-DB
• Macro Output In-DB

If either of these tools are included in the macro you are building, an error message will appear not allowing you to open a debug.  

Error message: Question Tool Load Error:  A question tool with a tool id of XXX is missing the associated question data.

Of course, Macro input and output tools do not require any specific action/question tool associated with it.  This is a bug.  A user pointed out the XML issue almost 3 years ago here:

In summary: "It appears that the tool itself inserts a hidden Question attribute into the XML which can also be seen in Workflow Configuration"

Source:

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Desktop-Discussions/In-DB-Macro-Input-and-Output-t...

Examples....

A normal macro, using standard tools:

After debugging a standard macro, the Macro Input/Output tools correctly change to a Text Input and a Browse tool.  This allows the macro author to test the macro.

However, when trying the same thing with In-DB tools in a macro, an error message appears:

In-DB macro 1:

In-DB Macro error message (after clicking "Open Debug"):

I would like to see Designer offer me the ability to chain workflows together where once Workflow A completes, Workflow B will automatically start.  There are times when linear processing is required in order to avoid dependency issues and/or for making it easier to organize complex processes. It would require outputting results to static files and it would take longer to process than the standard approach, but that is an expected trade-off.  Offering a GUI drag-drop "orchestrator" to tell Designer the order of operation would be even better than having to manually open each workflow and tell it which workflow to kick off next.

Toggle individual expressions on/off in the formula tool.   

On more than a few occasions I have a number of expressions in a single formula tool and find myself wanting to turn off a few or many, but not all. 

It'd be great if there was a checkbox to activate/inactivate : on/off : include/exclude : select/deselect (whatever language you like for the concept) an individual expression.

Simple as a text box.  with maybe a 'select/deselect  ALL box available incase you want to turn most off then only select a single one? 

Hello,

Just like Monetdb or Vertica, Clickhouse is a column-store database, claiming to be the fastest in the world. It's available on Cloud (like Snowflake), linux and macos (and here for free, it's open-source). it's also very well ranked in analytics database https://db-engines.com/en/system/ClickHouse and it would be a good differenciator with competitors.

https://clickhouse.com/

it has became more popular than Greenplum that is supported : (black snowflake, red greenplum, orange clickhouse)

Best regards,

Simon

Similar to this idea, I think it would be really helpful to be able to search for fields in the dropdowns when using the Sort tool. Having to scroll through all of the possible field names can be a chore if you have 50+

Hello all,

Sometimes, when you have too much time to retrieve your tables metadas, you can have this message

Initialization Timed Out: Workflow must be run for field meta info to be accurate.

From what I understand, it's Alteryx and the source system that drives the time out value. However, I have some cases where the long time is "normal" and that really hurts the user experience.
So, I would like the ability in settings to change the default value.

Best regards,

Simon