Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas

Why Alteryx does not have an easier way (Drag, Drop, Click and Run) to calculate moving averages with a specified lookback? There are so many things that one has to adjust before calculating moving averages for a simple numeric column.

I understand that there is a CrewMacros called "Moving Summarize" which does that, but it has a limitation of a lookback period of 100. What if you have data with millions of rows where you need a lookback in 1000s then there is no easy solution to this.

Does anyone know that this configuration is in the making? Moving Average is bread and butter for analysts like me. I am urging Alteryx developers to build this tool asap. and it will bring lot of comfort to my troubled soul.

Maybe i am clearly missing something here, please enlighten me!

Thank you!

Highlighted in this post: Solved: DateDiff question - Alteryx Community The DateDiff function under certain conditions does not work as you would expect and I suspect most people would not notice the inaccuracy.

Here is the formula for the Results Column below:

DateTimeDiff("2022-11-30",[Date],"months")

Currently, you have two choices for Auto Configure while working on workflows:

• Auto Configure switched on: After every change, the configurations (= columns) of tools are re-evaluated for the entire workflow (at least, this is how it feels like).
• Auto Configure switched off: Configuration of tools is only re-evaluated when pressing F5 (or when using the clipboard).

Pros and Cons of both:

• Auto Configure switched on:
  • Configuration in each tool is always accurate so that working on tools is straight forward.
  • Editing workflows gets annoyingly slow for complex workflows, especially when data sources from network locations or macros are used. Sometimes I have to wait a minute between two mouse clicks.
• Auto Configure switched off:
  • Editing workflows is faster (at least in theory).
  • I have to press F5 all the time (because I nearly always change output configuration of tools when working on workflows). Even after pressing F5, Alteryx does not always succeed in calculating the correct configuration of a tool.
  • Working with clipboard, loading, saving workflows is still slow.

I would love to have something in between all, kind of an intelligent Auto Configure with following features:

• F5 still starts full configuration evaluation.
• Configuration of input tools is frozen (unless F5 pressed) so that no network access is started during editing the workflow.
• Check for update of macro files is switched off (unless F5 pressed).
• After changing a tool configuration, either a flag is set that this tool was changed but no re-assessment of the workflow configuration is run (approach 1), or only downstream configuration is updated (approach 2). Whether approach 1 or 2 is started could be decided on various criteria: Number of downstream tools (or other measure of complexity), how many "change flags" according to approach 1 are already set, etc.
• If approach 1 was chosen: If you edit a tool which is downstream to another one for which the change flag is set, re-evaluate only the portion of the workflow between the previously changed upstream tool and the tool supposed to be edited.
• Using Clipboard should not invoke full re-configuration.
• Before saving a file, full re-configuration needs to be run (as already now).

This idea will add quite some complexity into the logic of Auto Configure but should have quite some potential to speed up editing workflows because network access and number of re-evaluated tools in each editing step will be reduced.

Please provide the ability to toggle on a dark mode for the Designer. The new version of Alteryx has changed the UI from a blue to a white. Its straining on the eyes with the lack of any contrast in the toolbar. I know about the ability to change the canvas colors, but it would be nice to toggle the entire UI from a white to a grey.

Dear UX Usual Suspects,

I've created a video for you to observe the idea:

With 400+ fields available, I find it challenging when I am validating my formula output to look at the "Referenced" fields of data plus the new data fields.  It would be oh-so-nice to press a button and look only at the "valuable" data.

How about you?  Do you want a little of this idea @Hollingsworth @T_Willins  @Aguisande @NicoleJ 

Cheers,

Mark

Currently only VADER algorithm is available however other algorithms might be interesting alternative. By other algorithms I mean: TextBlob, Flair and Custom option.

Cheers,

Pawel

Please asses the value of using d3js javascript library to create vizualisation.

D3 gallery examples

Thank you.

Regards,

Cristian.

CI / CD is critical to any production level process, especially when multiple authors are contributing new features to the same workflow. Currently, multi-author editing of workflows is extremely difficult, and something that would be aided greatly by using git to control different branches of ongoing work. Luckily, that's something we can already do today! However, the ability to test before merging a pull request is critical to modern CI / CD pipelines. For this, it we need to be able to run a headless workflow from a CI / CD environment. Also, having the ability to pass in parameters to the workflow would allow for robust integration testing - something that isn't straightforward today without running on production environments. 

The Workflow configuration window currently has "Canvas" as the default tab when clicking on whitespace in a workflow. 

Since workflow orientation, annotation settings, and progress settings tend to be consistent for a user, I think it makes more sense to have the default tab on something that might be more relevant to the user.

Workflow provides information that is useful...location of the workflow and constants related to the workflow.

Runtime has settings that can change often as the user is developing out the workflow.

So either of these would provide better access to more important info that that found on the Canvas tab.

I would to suggest to add a configuration in the Block Until Done tool, which allow the user to prioritize the release of a data stream through multiple Block Until Done tools in the same module. 

In the example below, the objective is to update multiple sheets in a single Excel workbook. Each sheet is a different data stream, that cannot be unioned together, therefore making the filtering of a single stream feeding into multiple Block Until Done from that filter solution impossible.

What I would like to be able to do is have a configuration, where Block Until Done #2 will not allow the data stream to pass through until Block Until Done #1 is complete, Then Block Until Done #3 will not pass through the data stream until Block Until Done #2 is complete, and so forth through the all the Block Until Done instances. 

Problem: The visual nature of Alteryx is one of its key selling points. The idea is to make work flows understandable. But when you're building something complicated, the lines cease being a helpful visualization and become a confusing mess instead. Lines cross each other. Lines cross out annotations. I know that there's wireless connections, but using too many of those makes the data flow hard to trace. So I spend time moving tools and boxes around, trying to get lines to cooperate, instead of chasing that thrill of solving. 

Solution: Users should be able to click the line and place an anchor which affects the line just like a tool would, but without doing anything to the data. It would just be a little point, not a full tool.  That way I could make the lines dodge my annotations without placing needless select tools or moving everything around. It could be located in the Documentation tab. 

Thanks for reading,

BG

Often I need to add filters or other tools early on after the workflow is already been mostly built. If a tool connects to one tool I can drag the filter over the connecting line and add the filter seamlessly. However in large workflows there is often this situation:    

The Filter will only connect to one of the lines I'm hovering over. If I could connect to all lines simultaneously and drop in the connection to achieve this (would be awesome):

Hi,

The basic table report tool could be improved by including a title option, such as a checkbox that allows you to add a title above the table.

When you want to add a title to a table, you must create a report text specifically for that purpose. The more significant improvement would be for situations in which you want to create tables grouped by a specific field. It would be nice to have the option to add a title per group as well, this would make it easier to add all of them to a report in a more dynamic way without having to do workarounds.

Collections in GALLERY by default must be sorted alphabetically or by creation data . Currently its displayed randomly and every time I have to do some kind of SORTING to get to what I want 

Thanks 

Within the Dynamic rename tool there is an option to ignore missing fields. 

It would be great if this was a bit more "Dynamic", for example if you wish to ignore duplicate field names for example. 

Otherwise you are left with warnings in a perfectly functioning workflow which some users may wish to control. 

Hello! I'm just wanting to highlight a couple of small issues I've found when trying to use the TS Covariate Forecast.

1. The example workflow does not open. This has been tested on multiple machines with different users. Right clicking the macro allows for the option 'Open Example Workflow':

However the button does not work/do anything. It is listed as a tool with a 'one tool example' (https://help.alteryx.com/20213/designer/sample-workflows-designer) so i would expect this to work.

2. Fix left/right labelling of input anchors. Currently the anchors are labelled incorrectly (compared with the join tool):

This can make things confusing when looking at documentation/advice on the tool, in which it is described as the left/right inputs.

Thanks!
TheOC

When working with APIs it is quite common to use the JSON parse tool to parse out the download data which has been returned from the API. However the JSON data may be missing key:value pairs as they are not in the response. This causes issues with downstream tools where there are missing fields. The current workaround for this is to use either the Crew macro Ensure fields, or union on a text input file to force the missing fields downstream.

The issue with this is:

1) Users may not be aware of the requirement to ensure fields are present

2) You need to know the names of all the fields to include in the ensure fields macro

Therefore the feature request is to add an option to the JSON parse tool to add the model schema as an input.

For example with the UK companies house API, to get a list of all the directors at a company the model schema is

{
    "active_count": "integer",
    "etag": "string",
    "items": [
        {
            "address": {
                "address_line_1": "string",
                "address_line_2": "string",
                "care_of": "string",
                "country": "string",
                "locality": "string",
                "po_box": "string",
                "postal_code": "string",
                "premises": "string",
                "region": "string"
            },
            "appointed_on": "date",
            "country_of_residence": "string",
            "date_of_birth": {
                "day": "integer",
                "month": "integer",
                "year": "integer"
            },
            "former_names": [
                {
                    "forenames": "string",
                    "surname": "string"
                }
            ],
            "identification": {
                "identification_type": "string",
                "legal_authority": "string",
                "legal_form": "string",
                "place_registered": "string",
                "registration_number": "string"
            },
            "links": {
                "officer": {
                    "appointments": "string"
                },
                "self": "string"
            },
            "name": "string",
            "nationality": "string",
            "occupation": "string",
            "officer_role": "string",
            "resigned_on": "date"
        }
    ],
    "items_per_page": "integer",
    "kind": "string",
    "links": {
        "self": "string"
    },
    "resigned_count": "integer",
    "start_index": "integer",
    "total_results": "integer"
}

But fields such as "resigned_on" are not always present in the data if there are no directors who have resigned. Therefore to avoid a user missing the requirement for unidentified fields needing to be added, if there was an optional input which took the model schema and therefore created the missing fields would greatly improve the API development process and minimise future errors being encountered once a workflow is in production.

Hello all,

When you copy and paste a layout tool to keep the formatting you just spent hours fixing it goes away as soon as you paste it. This is infuriating. Please keep the formatting from resting upon pasting.

Attached are pictures of a copy and pasted layout tool connected to the same incoming data source.

You can clearly see that the order and formatting has been removed. #Infuriating

Nick

PostPre

In cases where there are dynamic tools - you often get a situation where there are zero rows returned - which means that the output of something like a transpose or a JSON parse or a regex may not have the field names expected.

However - any downstream filter tools (or other similar tools) fail even though there are no rows (see screenshot below).

The only way to get around this is to insert fake rows using a union or use the CReW macro for Ensure Fields.    However, this is all waste since there are no rows so there's no point in even evaluating the predicate in the filter tool.     Rather than making users work around this - can we please change the engine so that a tool can avoid evaluation if there are zero rows - this will significantly reduce the amount of these kind of workaround that need to be used with any dynamic tools (including any API calls).

thank you

Sean