Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas

Hello,


As of today, when you connect o, a database, you go through a batch of queries to retrieve which database it is ( cf https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Ideas/Smart-Visual-Query-Builder-for-in-db-less-te... where I suggest a solution to speed up the process) and then, Alteryx queries the metadata. In order to get the column in each table, Alteryx use a SHOW TABLES and then loop on each table. This is really slow. 

However, since Hive 3.0, an information_schema with the list of columns for each  table is now available. I suggest to use the information_schema.columns instead of the time-consuming loop.

PS : I don't know if it's linked to the Active Query Builder, the third-party tool behind the Visual Query Builder. In that case, it would be a good idea to update it as suggested here https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Ideas/Update-Query-Builder-component/idi-p/799086

Best regards,

Simon

I believe many have voiced out this as their pain point within the Community. Essentially, there is no straightforward method to import multiple Excel files which are password protected.

 

I understand that there is an R solution suggested by several users, however, that is not ideal as it can be difficult to obtain permission from internal Tech team to install the package on the users' computers. 

 

Re-saving them without password is not only a hassle, but also raises concerns for data protection and security.

Would be great if you could support Snowflake window functions within the In-DB Summarize tool

This may have been raised before, but we would like to see the equivalent of PRICE and YIELD formulas from Excel in Alteryx's Formula tool. I believe many users in the finance industry are using formulas like these frequently and it would be helpful to be able to replicate the formula in Alteryx.

 

Manually building the formula is possible, however it is unnecessarily complicated especially if you are working on different calendar basis e.g. 30 /360 European.

 

Thank you!

Hello!
Currently i develop on a 2560 x 1440 monitor, and it is great for development of Alteryx workflows. 

However, from an accessibility perspective (and for demonstration purposes), the whole of the Alteryx Interface text and icons are far too small for anyone to read. For instance, this is what Designer looks like at the most common monitor size, 1920 x 1080:

 

And at my native resolution (2560 x 1440)

 

And 4k resolution, for comparison:

 

As you will notice - virtually everything is smaller, and unreadable at higher resolutions. It doesn't appear that this is a setting within Alteryx, and so I have to resort to windows settings to change the size:

Or as @CharlieS mentions here change the size of text across all applications.

It would be useful within Alteryx to have a 'scaling' slider/dropdown, so I do not have to change the resolution or size of applications within windows, to be able to easy read or demonstrate data from Alteryx Designer. 

Thanks,
TheOC

Hello!
Currently when using the DateTime and Text Pre-processing tool (I'm sure there are a few others), the default option is to have a new column as the output. For instance with DateTime:

There is no option to replace original field, simply create a new field. Setting the name as the same, will result in:

 

and with the Text-Preprocessing:
There is no option to specify an output column. The column you process, will become [field]_processed:

 

 

It would be awesome if both of these tools had functionality similar to the Multi-Row formula, with the ability to create a new field, or update existing field:

 

This would reduce data redundancy and need for additional select tools. Additionally with the Text Pre-Processing tool specifically, its very easy to make the mistake of not using the 'processed' field in future text based analysis, especially when the pre-processing tool is inserted into an already built connection.


Thanks,
TheOC

Hello,
Currently, the Sentiment analysis tool will score textual data by use of a Compound_Sentiment_Score, which is effectively a score from -1(negative) to 1(positive). 

 

The tool is great, in that it has a built-in classification function so that we can say that anything under -0.5 we want to label as negative, and anything over 0.5 we want to label as positive.

 

However currently, the defaults are set to:

Which effectively creates a negative-weighted classification, as anything from -1 to -0.1 are classified as negative. -1 to 0.5 are labelled as neutral, and 0.5 to 1 are labelled as positive.

 

My suggestion would be to change the default max negative classification to 0.5, to level the weighting of the tools scoring.

 

 

Thanks,
TheOC

hello!
Currently when using any spatial data or tool, by default, i have to select a reference base map each time:

This can be confusing for new users - as they may not realise within the browse tool (and other spatial tools) that you have to select this, especially with it being such a small setting at the top of the browse tool.

 

Now this can be solved by going into the User Settings, and changing this in the default settings:

 

However as mentioned, for new users this really isn't clear, and can be a roadblock in development. It would be fantastic if Alteryx defaulted the reference base map to Alteryx Light (or, any of them, other than [None]) to make these tools useable out of the box.

 

 

Thanks,
TheOC

Hello there!

Currently the email tool has the following configuration:

It is a fairly easy tool to use - however one part that I would like to be improved is testing the SMTP settings - similar to how it is done on the Alteryx Server. It would be awesome to have a button as part of this page, that would send a test email, and return true/display to the user that the email sent correctly. This would stop the need to setup dummy data and a dummy output to test a connection before rolling the email tool out into a live environment/use-case.

 

I imagine something along these lines for this functionality:

Clicking test (and passing):

Clicking test (and failing):

Thanks,
TheOC

 

Hello!

Currently, the Visual Layout tool (as opposed to the Layout tool) is in a Beta version and has been since I have been using Alteryx. 

I think it's a fantastic tool for (as in the name) visually laying out your reporting tools. I find the original layout tool difficult to use without great attention to detail, and it can cost a lot of time when building report-based workflows.

It would be great to get the Visual Layout tool out of Beta, similar to a lot of the other Laboratory tools (https://help.alteryx.com/20221/designer/laboratory), and increase confidence in using the tool. It is currently hard to suggest using the tool to Alteryx users, as 'BETA' creates apprehension of bugs and unstable functionality.

 

Thanks,
TheOC

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

Hello!

As many of you know, i'm a big fan of Alteryx Apps. However, one of the most painful parts of Alteryx Apps is moving around elements in the Interface Designer. Currently when you have many elements in your interface designer:

And add a new element from the dropdown, or through a new tool:

 

It is added to the bottom of the interface. Moving it to the top is currently done with the arrows, however this is very slow, especially when you have many interface elements:

Currently (with 9 radio buttons) it takes 18 clicks (each taking a couple of seconds due to delay between movements) to move it, because it moves between each step:

It would be fantastic if we could drag and drop the elements of the interface to where we like, for speed of development and ease of use.

 

Thanks,

TheOC 

Autofield is useful in the creation of a workflow.  Autofield consumes energy otherwise.  The AutoField functionality could Automagically have a convert to SELECT functionality so that once the ideal metadata is constructed that a SELECT tool could replace the AutoField.  Typically, when I autofield, I add a SELECT tool and then remove the autofield.

 

Another use case for Autofield is after reading in a CSV or after text to columns.  Having a smart option for parsing avoids the need to use this particular tool. 

 

Again, it is useful to have, just not useful to run on each workflow execution.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

It is my understanding that hidden in each yxdb is metadata.  The following use case is common:

 

As an Alteryx Developer/Designer I want to know the source of a yxdb.  

 

Ideally, I would know as much about the workflow (name, path, workflow version, AYX version, userid) as possible.

 

It would be awesome to be construct a workflow that would allow me to search the metadata of yxdb's on my client computers quickly.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

We've got your metadata.  Suppose the "SELECT COLUMNT TO SPLIT" question is considered by Alteryx and this happens:

 

• A field is selected because it contains similar \W (regex for non-word characters) patterns in the data (e.g. count of delimiters in the field are roughly equal).
• The delimiter (MODE delimiter or BEST) is defaulted
• Split # of columns = MODE count + 1

If a user updates the Field/Delimiter, the metadata could suggest the right Number of columns based upon the delimiter.

 

This all belongs in the automagically idea bank.  It saves me the time of counting delimiters or trial and error counts.

 

Cheers,

 

Mark

The JOIN tool could use some love.  Let's consider merging the JOIN and UNION functions into a single tool.  Instead of strictly L, J, and R outputs, we could have an option to allow for all standard SQL joins:

 

• Cross Join (Warning!!!)
• Inner Join (boring)
• Left Outer Join (saves time configuring Union)
• Right Outer Join (saves time ...)
• Full Outer Join (saves time ...)

Being able to JOIN on case-insensitive values is a big bonus (resisted urge to BOLD and change font size).

Being able to JOIN on date-range is often requested.

Being able to JOIN on numeric-range is often requested.

 

If we are combining tools, getting UNIQUE on L or R (or both) inputs would also save time.  Most JOIN errors are because the incoming (R) data contains duplicates by KEY.

 

cheers,

 

Mark

 

Hi @NicoleJ 

Hi Community Microsoft wil deprecate basic Authentication, so users will need OAuth2 to be included in the email tool. https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/exchange/clients-and-mobile-in-exchange-online/deprecation-of-basic... Microsoft is removing the ability to use Basic authentication in Exchange Online for Exchange ActiveSync (EAS), POP, IMAP, Remote PowerShell, Exchange Web Services (EWS), Offline Address Book (OAB), Outlook for Windows, and Mac. This change will be efective on October 1, 2022. Best regards, JP

The Find/Replace Tool in the Join tools is set to "Find Any Part of Field".

 

However, 99% of time, I select the "Entire Field", hence would like there to be a way to have the Entire Field checked as my standard box filled in.

 

It would be nice if Alteryx knew which field is most likely what I will use, based on always checking that box, or for none of them to be selected, to make sure I will select the correct one.

 

Most of the times when I have a mistake its because of this tool and it being set to "Any Part of Field" and I missed to change it.

 

Would imagine most people use this tool to find an exact match?

Alteryx is very quick already but it world be useful to know the computational cost of different approaches to building a workflow using a lot of data. This would make it easier to know if your optimization to the workflow is working as expected and also which tools in particular are doing the work best. Other software such as Power BI has a performance analysis section which breaks down how each action impacted performance. 

It would be great to get a similar breakdown of how long each tool is taking to run in the results window.