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
The Multi-Field Binning tool, when set to equal records, will assign any NULL fields to an 'additional' bin
e.g. if there are 10 tiles set then a bin will be created called 11 for the NULL field
However, when this is done it doesn't remove the NULLs from the equal distribution of bins across the remaining items (from 1-10).Assuming the NULLs should be ignored (if rest are numeric) then the binning of remaining items is wrong.
Suggestion is to add a tickbox in the tool to say whether or not NULL fields should be binned (current setup) or ignored (removed/ignored completely before binning allocations are made).
I've run into an issue where I'm using an Input (or dynamic input) tool inside a macro (attached) which is being updated via a File Browse tool. Being that I work at a large company with several data sources; so we use a lot of Shared (Gallery) Connections. The issue is that whenever I try to enter any sort of aliased connection (Gallery or otherwise), it reverts to the default connection I have in the Input or Dynamic Input tool. It does not act this way if I use a manually typed connection string.
Initially, I thought this was a bug; so I brought it to Support's attention. They told me that this was the default action of the tool. So I'm suggesting that the default action of Input and Dynamic Input tools be changed to allow being overridden by Aliased connections with File Browse and Action tools. The simplest way to implement this would probably be to translate the alias before pushing it to the macro.
The management of connections, especially in a collaborative environment is not cohesive or intuitive.
Would it be possible to Hide all annotations by default rather than each time a new workflow is created? It's a simple thing but can save time.
Workflow configuration
Requesting a reduced-cost, read-only license to allow for additional users in our organization be directly review workflows for UAT and control testing. Currently, the only individuals who can see the detail of Alteryx workflows directly are those with a full designer license or temporary trial license. In our Alteryx control structure, we have additional reviewers confirming the workflow who do not have licenses, which requires copious amounts of screenshots and/or direct meetings with our licensed designers to walkthrough the flows step-by-step. It would be much more efficient to provide a license that would allow folks to click through the integrations themselves, potentially allowing for comments and annotations, but without the ability to make direct changes. This would be much more cost efficient for our organization and allow for better workflow review and control.
Create a connector for Azure Cosmos DB, integrate it directly into their Alteryx workflows
Include a tool specific configuration to allow for the ability to turn off annotations on that specific tool instead of the global setting to turn them all off.
This would especially be useful for the SORT tool.
I find myself wasting multiple clicks in order to eliminate the annotations every time I insert a sort tool into my process flow, since it is rare when I actually need to include an annotation.
Hello all,
As you all know, you can use API with the Alteryx Download tool. However, this tool is not that easy to configure.
On the other hand, the API world use a lot tools such as Postman or Bruno (an open source clone) which allows easy test, debug... I use it everytime I had to work on a rest API and then I try to translate it to the final tool (such as the Alteryx Download tool). Both tools offer "collection", a set of request, and also environment configuration. Here are some examples on the project I'm working on :
And you can even get some code
I would like to leverage those collections in my download tool configuration, that would be quite easier to use !
Best regards,
Simon
Vanilla Alteryx Chained Apps can only progress linearly, which means developers could not let users skip few applications ( or ) reach the last app in the chain ( or ) let the user select which specific app to trigger based on the requirement.
This can be bypassed by using a render tool with output as PCXML and HTML link of the Application you can trying to divert to, which does not affect the existing workflow in any way.
By using the below set of tools on any workflow/chained app you can either branch the flow of apps ( or ) you can skip a few apps in the chain.
Image 1 - Input Configuration with the flow that can be part of any existing application
Image 2 - Text Tool Configuration
Image 3 - Render tool Configuration
POC in action
Now If clicked on App 1, it would divert me to www.Alteryx.com
Keywords : Chained Applications, Chained Apps, Application Sequence, Skip Application Sequence, Branch Application Sequence, Application Order, Controlled Order, Trigger Next Application
Regards,
Maithreyan S
I find it extremely annoying having to individually disable/enable control containers in a workflow. It would be nice if there was a way to select all control containers that I want to disable/enable and then be able to right click and do it quickly in one motion. This would save me a lot of time when working with 10+ control containers.
Is it possible to add sort functionality to the Sample tool in Designer, similar to the 'Sample Based on Order' functionality in the Sample tool in Designer Cloud? This would cut down on the Sort + Sample tool combo in Designer!
Thanks!
Apologies if this has been suggested or exists. I often find myself using manual Excel files as a data source. These files frequently use cell formatting elements, such as cell color and text color, to convey important information. However, when these files are imported into Alteryx, this valuable formatting information is unfortunately lost.
To address this, a dedicated input tool that can read Excel files with separate fields for these formatting elements would be very helpful. This would be incredibly beneficial, especially when the data lacks other fields that relate to the coloring. Currently, I manage to achieve this using a Python tool, but integrating this as a built-in feature in Alteryx would undoubtedly be more efficient and user-friendly. This enhancement would not only simplify data preparation but also ensure the preservation of the full context of the original Excel file.
Whether it is a date range or a numeric range, I would like an official tool that can tell me where the gaps exist within the range.
The Find and Replace tool currently replaces text or appends fields by reviewing the first word in the string and evaluating if there is a matching value in the lookup replace table. If there is, it returns the replace text or it continues onto the next word in the string and repeats until a match is found or not found.
However the functionality should be that the entire string is evaluated and the first match in the replace lookup table is returned. This is similar to how the VLOOKUP formula functions in Excel.
This makes workflows easier to maintain as the ordering of the lookup table can be amended to return the appropriate value. The ordering of the source string is far trickier to automate/change.
I have seen workarounds where append fields is used to append all lookup values to each row and then find rows which contain the string and use a sample tool to return the first row, however this causes processing issues when working with large number of records/ lookup values.
The functionality should either be changed or at least a setting which can be toggled to switch between the two options.
Hello,
We would like to have further options in the test tool. As of today you can only test if records matches (equality test) , we would like to be able to test also when it is greater (>) and smaller (<).
Thanks !
Hi all
Currently when you set your workflow to don't write outputs (disable all tools that write output) under runtime of the configuration of workflow- the render and green output tools become greyed out and do not write an output (as expected).
However, this is not the case for connectors - for example, if you use the SharePoint output tool and click disable all tools that write output, it will not be greyed out and still write an output. Is it possible for these connectors to also not run when this is selected in the configuration? As otherwise currently, you have to add it to a container and disable it.
I love the ability to cache data. Sometimes, I've cached too far and I need to go back and alter a tool's configuration or make some other cache-destroying change. I then have to recache somewhere and sometimes the dataset is so huge it is a pain. I'd love to create multiple cache points as a safety or backup.
In conjunction with the "First N% of Rows" and "Group by column (optional)" features, an additional option that would be great to have would be to tell the tool to take at least 1 record per group. If I am telling the tool to take the first 3% of records and grouping by a field, but one of the groups only has 5 records, it won't return any records for that group, as 3% of 5 is .15, so the tool rounds that down to 0. If I could also choose an option for the tool to always round up, that would also be sufficient.
In the formula tool, you can generate uniform random values using the RAND() function.
I would like to have similar functionality to get normal random values by calling RANDN().
As a workaround, the values can be produced from a Python tool using
numpy.random.randn()
Python documentation on numpy.random.randn.
The full script below produces 100 random normal values in a column called 'Normal_Rand'.
The zip file has both a direct workflow and macro solution to produce the random normal values.