Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas

 The Download tool is so much more than Downloads. Think about the situation where you are using the Download tool to upload invoices and try explaining that to co-workers. "Oh yes - I'm going to implement the API to upload the invoices using the Alteryx download tool..." Could we call it the Curl tool or something?

Hi all,

 

As per the post here: https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Data-Preparation-Blending/Dynamic-input-not-respecting-data-sort/td... - there are situations where you need to use something like a dynamic input to query data, but need it to be brought back in the order that you specified on the input stream.

 

The Dynamic Input too sorts the input stream deliberately, to check for duplicate queries so that it doesn't waste time bringing back duplicate data.

 

It would be great if we can extend the dynamic input tool to allow users to specify that they wish the data unsorted, and that they are OK with the consequences of possibly running the same query twice.    Even if this is a setting that can only be set through XML, it would still be helpful.

 

Many thanks

Sean

I am on a forecasting project where we convert one vector of forecasts into another vector of forecasts by multiplying by a conversion matrix. This is very clumsy and fragile to do in Alteryx meaning we have to drop out to Excel. The ability to do very simple matrix multiplication in Alteryx would be very useful here and in other use cases. I realise you can probably exit to R and do the job, but for something so basic that shouldn't be required.

 

The relational representation of an mxp matrix is a three column table of cardinality mxp with columns { I , J , A }, where I labels the first index set with index i, J labels the second index set with index j, and A labels the numeric values with value a(i,j).  Given a second pxn  matrix { J, K, B } in relational form we should be able to multiply them to get a mxn matrix { I, K, C} in relational form where of course c(i,k) = sum over j in J of a(i,j)*b(j,k).

 

Vectors can of course be represented as 1x and x1 matrices. If you really wanted to go to town this could be generalised to array processing ala APL2.

 

In Render tool you can use a field to group by and use that field to alter the output file name somewhat similar to the output tool.  Unfortunately it is not exactly like the output tool.  Usually you have a table tool and or layout or visual layout tool before the Render.  In my most recent scenario I have several outputs I use the Table tool for to format, the text tool to generate headings and the visual layout tool to organize these headings and tables into coherent sections on a final output used as a dashboard. 

 

Fine and dandy except a new requirement now divides these data based on client so I tried to find a way to pass the Client code through to the Render tool so it could dynamically alter the output file so each client gets their version without manually creating multiple replicated streams to format.  But the Render tool requires a field and if I am passing a table it can't reference columns (fields) within the table and if I build a client code field to pass outside the table I can't seem to find a way to tag it to the table  and text going into the layout or in some way pass it into the layout tool in a meaningful way to reach the Render tool for use in dynamic rename of output file.

 

I wish there was a way to pass a field into the Render tool to modify output file name whether feeding it tables or other data or mixed elements.  Maybe a pass through element or something?

Hi all,

 

When testing a macro with interface tools in use - the value that is used if running in normal execution (hit the big play button) is 0 or blank, irrespective of the value set for default on the component.

e.g.

• put an up-down component on a canvas with a default value of 200
• Then hook it up to a formula box
• Then output the value 
• The value which is output is 0

 

Please can you change this so that the value passed through the interface tools in testing mode is the specified & configured default value?

 

Thank you

Sean 

It's not uncommon to start out with an InputData control, and then 2/3 of the way through you realise that you need to change this to a dynamic input.

Could we add the capability to right-click on an inputData; and convert to Dynamic Input (just like you can on a TextInput to change it to a Macro Input)?

Rather than giving the users a big list of different date formats to choose from, allow the user to construct their own format with syntax of the incoming date that they are dealing with.

Currently I need to do a string function moving dates around to match a predefined syntax...

On the “Multi-Field Formula” tool, the default is to “copy output fields and Add….”  I think the default should NOT copy. I’m using this tool to trim all of the blank spaces, and change the case in text fields. I often forget to uncheck it and end up with all these additional fields at the end. With regard to the tool container, I think the default margin should be small. I build huge workflows, and putting each section in a tool container. I have to go in and change each one to small margins to condense the workspace. Perhaps in the user settings, under document, there could be a default margin option, just as there is a container color option.

 

That has bugged me for years.

A connector tool for the GSuit API that would enable us to import email contents, attachments, and other Google apps data into Alteryx.

The dynamic input tool allows some fairly complex transformations to the underlying query - but it's not always easy to debug this when it doesn't behave as expected.

Could we add the ability to inspect the resulting query (just like you can on the InDB queries using the dynamic output component?)

 

It is currently possible to see this in the results / messages pane, but I can't find a way to get this into a data-stream to persist it or manipulate it.

Sometimes we may have polygons, such as county boundaries, and need to split the polygons into smaller areas using polylines, such as roads. Please consider adding a polygon split by lines tool. I imagine it could be like the Poly-Split tool, but accept two inputs of a polygon field and a polyline field.

Adding "Lightning Bolt" connectors to the standard workflow tools to allow dynamic automation of the settings would be a game changer. I believe that this would enable us to create universally dynamic and adaptive workflows which could be used as drop in solutions for most datasets. This would turn the standard tools into a dynamic ones and dramatically reduce the tool count to accomplish dynamic tasks, and make complex workflows much easier to internalize. Making standard workflow tools more dynamic would allow us to easily dynamically incorporate conditional tests / values / fieldname selections / bypass / etc into tools like detour / filter / formula / unique / transpose / crosstab / summarize / Outputs / etc. I would also like to see the ability to utilize a bool field to bypass any given tool in a workflow. That way we could do things like conditionally bypass an entire formula tool which would dramatically simplify complex formula construction, turn on and off inputs / outputs, simplify error avoidance, etc.

 

In order to build complex dynamic conditional workflows with the current tool capabilities, most of us are forced to use custom macros (often a multitude of workflow specific ones as well), constantly add and remove formula created fields for message relay, and create complex multi-routings / tests / unions in a standard workflow with large numbers of tools and containers. This hides many of our tasks within short-term use fields / custom macros and it makes the rest of our workflows voluminous and less intuitive.

 

On the User Interface side, I recommend a simple approach. Next to the standard tool setting there should be a dynamic input option which allows you to select the source field in the lightning bolt connector. Next to that, there should be an icon that can be clicked on to pop up a short text description and a basic screen shot of data in the correct format for dynamic input. I would also like to see a check box at the bottom for manual tool "bypass" which can also be dynamically controlled. (This would especially be helpful on outputs, but it would also be helpful to allow formulas and filters to be kept in place for future use even when they should not currently be used) Turned off tools could be highlighted in a red background or something.

 

This would be useful for anyone creating dynamic and adaptive workflows, but it would especially expand Alteryx Designer's capability to attract more custom software developers like me.  It would dramatically reduce the need for a large number of complex workflow specific macros that clutter our systems. Users that find the traditional workflow tool approach easier for them could easily use the tools as normal by simply using the standard manual settings. Advanced users could simplify the creation of universally dynamic and self adaptive workflows.

 

The option to "Disable all tools that Write Output" is great during testing but I often need to toggle back and forth and its location on the Runtime tab of the Workflow Config is inconvenient.

 

I think it would be great to have a button for that on the toolbar with the added feature that it would visually display whether the feature is on or off (so you don't need to see an Output Data tool to determine the current status)

At the moment, we use ODBC driver to connect with Dremio.  However, we have experienced that this connection fail when connect with Tableau until a native connector has been built.  

 

Do you think Alteryx can work with Dremio on building a connector for stable connection?  Thank you.

It would be great if Alteryx allowed users to copy and paste data directly from excel into the workflow canvas as a text input. Sometimes I create quick mapping tables in excel that I do not want to save on my desktop or shared drive as it is a quick fix or solution. Tableau allows users to copy and paste data sets directly into a sheet for use. Can we make this happen??

 

Yours Truly,

 

Trevor

 

I test the  10% percentile for {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9}, whch alteryx gives 1.8, while it should be 1.
According the help, it should return the value of the target row, which shall not result any decimal in this case.

Currently on the input tool I can only specify if the first row contains data.  It would be great if I could simply specify which row the data starts on, ie. row 4 or row 500, and then specify which row, if at all, contains the headers.

Please add option to right-click a module tab to rename the yxmd file.  This would be easy to do, for you, and quite handy.