Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Alteryx designer Discussions

Find answers, ask questions, and share expertise about Alteryx Designer.

Unclear on Iterative Macro output methods




I built an iterative macro today, which works great (and is based on a very helpful post by @AdamR), but I am a bit confused about how the macro returns results based on the Output Mode settings.  If I select "Auto Configure by Name" (which is what Adam had in his example, and which makes logical sense), I only get the first record from each iteration returned in the macro output.  But if I select "All iterations will have the same output schema", I get all of the records returned.


macro config.png


My macro is set up very similarly to Adam's, so I would expect it to behave the same way.  So just a little confused...I'm happy that I get the results I need, but I'm unhappy that what I would take to be a logical configuration setting doesn't produce the results I would expect. :-) . Any insights would be appreciated.


macro workflow.png

ACE Emeritus
ACE Emeritus

Hi @mix_pix,

My understanding is that it's basically a union taking place between all iterations of the loop: each iteration result value gets unioned with the results of all previous iterations.  So, if you understand how "Auto-Configure By Name" (or Position) in the Union tool, the same concept applies here.  In your macro, for whatever reason, it may be that field names are different between iterations.  Things to try: you could also try auto-config by position, if it's always however many columns of basically the same data; or (preferable, I'm thinking) you could put a select tool prior to the output to ensure that you always have the same field name and type going to the output.

Hope that helps!




Hi John,


Thanks for the reply.  What is thoroughly weird is that I changed my macro to 'Auto Configure by Name' (the setting I had tried initially), saved it and then re-ran the workflow (changing nothing) and the output worked as I had expected it to originally.  A bit baffling, but it's working as it should, so I guess I'll just chalk it up to gremlins. :-)