Be sure to review our Idea Submission Guidelines for more information!
Submission GuidelinesHello,
After used the new "Image Recognition Tool" a few days, I think you could improve it :
> by adding the dimensional constraints in front of each of the pre-trained models,
> by adding a true tool to divide the training data correctly (in order to have an equivalent number of images for each of the labels)
> at least, allow the tool to use black & white images (I wanted to test it on the MNIST, but the tool tells me that it necessarily needs RGB images) ?
Question : do you in the future allow the user to choose between CPU or GPU usage ?
In any case, thank you again for this new tool, it is certainly perfectible, but very simple to use, and I sincerely think that it will allow a greater number of people to understand the many use cases made possible thanks to image recognition.
Thank you again
Kévin VANCAPPEL (France ;-))
Thank you again.
Kévin VANCAPPEL
It would be really usefull when we can filter fields by name and make selection. At times I have work with 300+ fields and it's really hard to scroll down to select few fields. Tableau has this feature. Wer can have this feature in select and all embedded select tools (join, append etc)
I saw this article (Oculus App Makes Programming Tangible To Non-Coders) and immediately thought of Alteryx.
How about a virtual reality based version where the user can be in the canvas and reach out and touch their data directly?
Hi!
Just thought up a simple improvement to the US Geocoder macro that could potentially speed up the results. I'm doing an analysis on some technician data where they visit the same locations over & over again. I'm doing a full year analysis (200k + records) & the geocoder takes a bit to churn thru that much data. In the case of my data though, it's the same addresses over & over again & the geocoder will go thru each one individually.
What I did in my process & could be added to the macro is to put a unique tool into the process based off address, city, state, zip, then Geocode the reduced list, then simply join back to the original data stream using a join based off the address, city, state, zip fields (or use record id tool to created a unique process id to join off).
In my case, the 200k records were reduced to 25k, which Alteryx completed in under a minute, then joined back so my output was still the 200k records (all geocoded now).
Not everyone will have this many duplicates, but I'd bet most data has a few, & every little bit of time savings helps when management is waiting on the results haha!
I've used the Table tool with large data sets to make tables with conditional formatting etc. There's a couple of suggestions I'd like to see.
1. I noticed an issue where if you disconnect from the tool prior to the Table tool before it forgets your settings quite easily and you may need to redo them. This is quite frustrating if you have lots of columns
2. The controls for sorting and interacting with columns aren't very good, if they were more like the select tool controls that would be fantastic. Perhaps this could be resolved with a select tool beforehand but I still think it is worth putting on the table tool itself.
3. Render output. when making excel outputs with multiple sheets of varying sizes, its very difficult to control. The sheets all stretch to the largest size. I've found I've had to put in white space in Report Text tools on one side of a table tool in order to make up the space and prevent stretching. (I found that solution on the forums)
Thanks.
Frank
I regularly create events to capture messages from workflows or kick off batch scripts for other processes and they are repetitive. Is there a way to template some of these?
This could even be as simple as a saving the .yxft type file, where it is only saving the setting.
From what I can tell using ProcMon, presently when using the Directory tool to list files (including subdirectories) the Alteryx Engine runs a single threaded process.
When you're trying to find files by checking recursively in large network paths, this can take hours to run.
It would be great if the tools would split up lists of directories (maybe by getting two or three levels down first) and then run each of those recursive paths in parallel.
While it is possible to do this using a custom Python or cmd->PS command, it would be great if this could just be a native part of the application.
I would like Alteryx to offer a native Fuzzy Join tool that allows two datasets with completely different schemas to be joined using Fuzzy matching logic (Dice coefficient algorithm, Levenshtein distance algorithm, etc.). Any matches would be output to a new table with either exactly matched or fuzzy matched primary and secondary records. I want this tool be supported by Server as well.
This idea has arisen from a conversation with a colleague @Carlithian where we were trying to work out a way to remove tools from the canvas which might be redundant, for example have you added a select tool to the canvas which hasn't been configured to change a data type or rename a field. So we were looking for ways of identifying in the workflow xml for tools which didn't have a configuration applied to them.
This highlighted to me an issue with something like the data cleanse tool, which is a standard macro.
The xml view of the data cleanse configuration looks like this:
<Configuration>
<Value name="Check Box (135)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (136)">False</Value>
<Value name="List Box (11)">""</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (84)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (117)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (15)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (109)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (122)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (53)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (58)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (70)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (77)">False</Value>
<Value name="Drop Down (81)">upper</Value>
</Configuration>
As it is a macro, the default labelling of the drop downs is specified in the xml, if you were to do something useful with it wouldn't it be much nicer if the interface tools were named properly - such as:
So when you look at the xml of the workflow it's clearer to the user what is actually specified.
I think the undo/redo capabilities in Alteryx could be greatly improved. Here is an idea that I think would be beneficial...
I'd like to see which exact tools are affected by my undo/redo actions. An idea was suggested a couple years ago to move your location on the canvas, but that was not added to the roadmap. Instead, is it possible to add the tool ID to the undo menu so that it is obvious which tool each line is detailing?
This is the current debug menu that shows your previous actions:
When a tool is created, the ID can be displayed in this menu, but this is not shown when a change is made to an existing tool. My suggestion is that the menu would say:
4. Change Sort (3) Properties
This same change should be made in the Edit dropdown menu.
There is a lot of usage of calendar events in business world. Having a native sync and input functions for popular calendar formats like ical or google calendars will save a lot of time
Can we have a User Setting that allows the users to select if Alteryx should prevent the computer to go into Sleep or Hibernate mode when running a workflow?
Hello Alteryx Community,
If like me, you've been developing in Alteryx for a few years, or if you find yourself as a new developer creating solutions for your organization - chances are you'll need to create some form of support procedure or automation configuration file at some point. In my experience, the foundation of these files is typically explaining to users what each tool in the workflow is doing, and what transformations to the data are being made. These are typically laborious to create and often created in a non-standardized way.
The proposal: Create Alteryx Designer native functionality to parse a workflow's XML and translate the tool configurations into a step by step word document of a given workflow.
Although the expectation is that after something like this is complete a user may need to add contextual details around the logic created, this proposal should eliminate a lot of the upfront work in creating these documents.
Understand some workflow may be very complex but for a simple workflow like the below, a proposed output could be like the below, and if annotations are provided at the tool level, the output could pick those up as well:
Workflow Name: Sample
1) Text Input tool (1) - contains 1 row with data across columns test and test1. This tool connects to Select Tool (2).
2) Select Tool (2) - deselects "Unknown" field and changes the data type of field test1 to a Double. This tool connects to Output (3).
3) Output (3) - creates .xlsx output called test.xlsx
Hello!
Just another QOL change from me today.
When building a workflow - just for fun sometimes I like to make mistakes. It's never by accident I promise 😎
Now theoretically, if I did make a mistake, and put a tool in the wrong place (or want to refactor, or want to move a select earlier in the workflow etc), I would typically right click, cut and connect around, and then right click the connection I want to paste onto. This works fine, however, some users are unaware of it, and it can still be a bit of a pain.
What would be really nice, is if we could hit ctrl and click/drag a tool, to move it elevated of connections. I have attempted to create a couple of gifs to illustrate.
The current method of moving a tool within a workstream:
What I'd love, if you could hold ctrl + drag:
Cheers!
Owen
I know there is an idea for Dynamic Summarize, however I think with only small change to Summarize tool this could be achieved.
If we set the Summarize to Group by all our dimensions but then use ListBox + Action to control which dimensions we want to select - wouldn't it be nice (ahh Beach Boys comes to mind) to be able to tell Summarize tool that if the dimension in group by is not found just ignore it? At the moment it throws an error. I just think such small configuration would achieve this, right?
Please let me know what you think
Hi
I'm really missing a search in the medata phane?
If I am on data phane:
If im browsing though metadata:
Hello,
Please add UI-related Themes to choose from such as a Dark Theme, so that all aspects of the UI changes accordingly.
Without a Dark Theme, it is very difficult to work in Designer for a long time.
Add these themes under User Settings --> Themes tab
Thanks!
When numerous formulae exist within a single formula object, being able to "Expand All / Collapse All" would be most welcomed. :-)
Also - the ability to Disable/Enable a single formula in the formula object - also very nice to have.
Hello!
This is along the same lines as my other thread:
https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Ideas/Allow-For-Drag-and-Drop-in-The-Interface-Des...
I love building Analytic Apps, and i wish it was just a little bit quicker to do.
Currently when adding an element from the dropdown to the interface designer:
it will always be added to the bottom of the interface:
And requires moving manually. It would be great if depending on where you have selected on the interface, the element is created. For instance, i would like to select one of my elements:
Hit add - Label:
And the label be created under my element:
Thanks,
TheOC
I want modification of the Email Tool to support running it at a specific point, defined by developer, within a workflow where currently "The Email tool will always be the last tool to run in a workflow".
We use the tool to send notification of completion of jobs and sometimes attach outputs but we would like to be able to also send notifications at the start or at key points within a workflows processing. Currently the email tool is forced to be the last tool run in a flow, even if you use block until done tool to force order of path execution to hit the email tool first.
If we could add a setting to the configuration to override the current default, of being the last tool run, to allow it to run at will within a flow that would be awesome! And of course we would want the same ability for texting, be it a new feature of the email tool or a new tool all its own.
The Texting option refers to an issue in Andrew Hooper's post seeking enhancement of the email tool for texting, search on "Email tool add HTML output option" or use link...
When you have an Alteryx workflow open, Alteryx seems to by default try to keep you up to date on what might be happening with your data when it runs through your workflow. So if you for example add a misconfigured tool (a filter not connected to an input) and click somewhere on the canvas it'll presumably try to compile the code and then figure out that the new tool is misconfigured and it'll tell you why. A major thing it does seems to be that it tries to figure out if macros included in the workflow have changed and to take such changes into account so that it can notify you if there's a problem somewhere e.g. with the macro's output schema or whatever. I know it's doing this kind of thing because the moment I add a macro to the workflow I'll have to spend a 15-20 second 'tax' every time I touch the workflow canvas, a formula, when I click on a join, etc. Sometimes it's 30 seconds, sometimes you get lucky and it'll only be 5 seconds. This delay is by now from my perspective considered a fixed cost of adding a macro to a workflow. I'm assuming similar processes also take place in the context of other dependencies (main one probably being queries inside input tools) and that they may also cause problems for similar reasons.
I'm assuming part of the reason for the long delays is that the macro repository where we usually save macros in my organisation is saved in a server location which is close to the Alteryx server executing the in-production workflows/macros, but not close to me when I'm developing in my office. Yes, I could save the macros I develop elsewhere (locally) and then only save them in the repository when they're 'complete' (...we all know exactly when that's the case; we're never in doubt about that, right? ...and you'll still have problems if you need to modify a workflow which includes macros later, even if you're not touching the macro itself). I'm actually doing that in some contexts where the above user experience has been frustrating enough to justify such a step, and I'm always trying to find ways to just outright kill Alteryx' live connection to the macro (e.g. by caching the output) if it's not critical. But these things are not solutions, they're poor workarounds some of which are adding complexity and the potential for errors as a result of a problem which really shouldn't be a problem.
It would be desirable to have the option to pause these kinds of 'background processes'/'semi-live compiling'/'whatever', make Alteryx do this kind of thing less frequently, add an 'only update meta-data when running' option, or some fourth option of a similar nature. Debugger-mode is implicitly always on, why not give the option of turning that off if the user figures s/he can handle that? Give me the error when I try to run the workflow, don't try to have the software figure out if the code will run with an error every time I even touch it - this is not always helpful, it's in some contexts causing a huge waste of developer time.
User | Likes Count |
---|---|
7 | |
4 | |
4 | |
3 | |
3 |