This is a QoL-request, and I love me some QoL-updates!
While I'm developing I often need the output of a workflow as input for the next phase of my development. For example: an API run returns job location, status, and authentication ids. I want to use these in a new workflow to start experimenting what'll work best. Because of the experimenting part, I always do this in a new workflow and not cache and continue in my main flow.
Writing a temporary output file always feels like unnescesary steps, and tbh I don't want to write a file for a step that'll be gone before it reaches production. Esp if there is sensitive information in it.
I surprisingly couldn't find this anywhere else as I know it's been discussed in person on many occasions.
Basically the Formula tool needs to be smarter in many ways, but this particular post focuses on the Data Type component.
The formula tool, should not always default to V_String as the data type when entering data or a formula into the formula tool, it should look at the data type and estimate the most likely option.
I know there are times where the logical type might not be consistent in all fields, but the Data Preview and the Function of the formula should be used to determine the most likely option.
E.G. If I type a number or a date directly into the formula tool, then Alteryx should be smart enough to change the data type from the standard V_String to Int, Double or date.
This is an extension to the ideas posted here:
I often need to create a record ID that automatically increments but grouped by a specific field. I currently do it using the Multi-Row Formula tool doing [Field-1:ID]+1 because there is no group by option in the Record ID tool.
Also, sometimes I need to start at 0 but the Multi-Row Formula tool doesn't allow this so I have to use a Formula tool right after to subtract 1.
So adding a group by option to the Record ID tool would allow the user not to use the multi-row formula to do this and to start at any value wanted.
We have 'CountDistinct' and 'Concatenate' options within Summarize tool.
But 'Concatenate' displays all the instances of value for a Grouped field, this might include lot of duplicates.
It would be great to have an option like 'ConcatDistinct'.
For example -
Group by 'Branch' and 'ConcatDistinct' Customer should result as Figure 1 instead of Figure 2 -
While this is achievable in different ways currently with a set of tools, but it gets tedious when number of fields is large from which distinct values are to be captured.
As each version of Alteryx is rolled out, it would be much easier for our users and admin team to validate the new version, if Alteryx allowed parallel installs of many different versions of the software.
So - our team is currently on 11.3 - if we could roll out 11.5 in parallel then we could very easily allow users to revert to 11.3 if there are issues, or else remove 11.3 after 2-3 weeks if no issues.
The same goes for versions which are in BETA.
This would be a huge help!
When creating a workflow I generally open a "TEMPLATE" first and then immediately save it to the "NEW WORKFLOW NAME". My template includes all my preferences that aren't set naturally within the user settings and won't get RESET by them either. It has a comment box and containers as well as logos and copyrights. It would be nice to have ready access to this feature. Maybe others have standards that they want applied to all users and their workflows too.
Our company often builds applications where we need the ability for it to dynamically update dropdowns based on a user's previous selections.
We can do this in other programs, but unfortunately the lack of dynamic selections/dependent dropdowns is a big limitation for us when building Alteryx applications. Our current workarounds are chaining applications together, or using PyQt within the workflow. Chaining is clunky and often causes unforeseen issues when uploading to Server with errors that are non-descriptive, and using PyQt comes with Python versioning issues.
If this interactivity can somehow be added to Alteryx applications it would be a huge upgrade to our current Alteryx processes. Any suggestions for further workarounds would also be helpful!
When using a File Browse to get a file from a user on the gallery, I want to be able to limit the sheets available as options to select from. Currently all sheets and named ranges in the workbook appear in the list. In the example below, I would want to be able to limit the options to just the Allow sheet so that the <List of Sheet Names> and the Don't Allow sheet are not even options for the user.
I've been spending some time looking at low-code app development platforms, and one of the features that these have which it would be great to see added into Alteryx Analytic Apps is the ability to display results directly in the app interface pane.
At the moment when an app successfully runs the results can be shown in a pop-out window, as shown below:
An example from a low code built app is this:
Therefore the new feature it would be great to add is a browse result window within the interface tool, or a way to render the results and display that in the window.
Looking forward to hearing from others and what else have you seen with web apps that it would be great to improve Alteryx Analytic Apps with?
My idea comes when I've built an application, where user select filter from drop-down list. However it contains thousands of records, so it takes lot's of time to find desired record.
In Excel and MS Access when you use filter you can put many letter and filter shows rows that match the input. In Alteryx user can only put first letter, which is huge drawback to my users.
This is how it works in Excel:
Hope you like it!
I would love to be able to have an interface tool that allows a user to search through drop down values (when there are more than 100 or so) similar to autocomplete. It would be helpful as a multiselect or single select drop down. I have inserted a very poorly mocked up picture below. It would essentially be a modified version of the drop down as all the values would be in the tool, but the user could type to find what they are looking for.
When training people on the use of action tools, something that I always have to hit on is that when you are telling the tool which piece of the XML that you are adjusting, it's sort of difficult to tell what you have selected, and super easy to accidentally select something else.
When you initially select the action to take it's this nice Blue Color. However, it still doesn't feel exactly like you have actually selected anything or told the Action Tool what to do, since it's so easy to just select any other one of these actions.
A slightly different problem is that if you are selecting an action that has been previously configured, it is just this light grey color. So it can be easy to accidentally change your settings because you may not realize it's actually set up.
Here is a recent community post that sort of outlines a few of these problems.
Sometimes I will get the error "You have found a bug". Could this include a link to a stack trace, or some diagnostics that might allow us to see what the problem is? Or suggestions to turn on logging, perhaps?
I understand that new users do not want to see stack traces, but Alteryx is a serious business tool and it should give users a chance to find workarounds, but for that we need more diagnostics.
It would be helpful to have the same options for App chaining as Events in cases where there is user intervention required to correct input parameters, etc. This would also create continuity between a scheduled workflow and a Gallery app when you are upgrading a workflow for ad-hoc cases and interactivity.
I've recently been delving into using the interface tools and there are a couple of glaring issues for me as a developer/designer, all having to do with the UI, ironically (yes, I used that correctly!) with the interface tools. The irony here is that the interface tools utilise a poor user interface.
Firstly, I finished this video to ensure I was indeed doing things correctly, and I was.
The UI for designer's interface tools is incredibly sluggish. In order to rearrange tools, each time you create a new one, you have to push the up arrow for each tool and you have to traverse the groupings.
Instead of this, I suggest two changes to the interface designer.
I know not everyone is building macros/apps and dealing with this, so I have little faith that this will jump to the top of your queue. But this is a painful part of the UI. I don't know if your UX designers could easily fix this or if it is more pain on your end than the pain you're giving me, but I just want to say: This hurts. 35 clicks every time I add a new element with no option to 'move to top' like you (wonderfully) do in the select tool is a big drag on my time (hint: maybe add that sort of functionality too; the select tool manages this stuff so well!). Which is supposedly valuable. In theory. But it certainly doesn't feel that way when I've spent 10 minutes clicking an up arrow (and yes, my UI is slow. And I may be exaggerating, but not by much!).
Thank you for your continued improvement!
I know this has been posted before, but the posts are fairly old, and I have just confirmed with Support that it is still an issue. Seems to be a pretty basic request, so I'm putting it out there again under this new heading.
The issue is that if you have data in a field, and you have that data separated by a new line (\n), it will show up fine in a browse tool, or pretty much any other output (database file, Office Document file, etc.). But if you try to use the Table Tool under Reporting, it ignores the line break and strings the data together.
The field data looks like this in a browse or most other outputs:
Hello, my name is
and I love
But when I try to pull this field into a Table Tool, it shows up like this:
Hello, my name is Michael Barone and I love Alteyrx
Putting this out here again in hopes that it gets lots and lots of stars so it gets put on the road map!!
The method of saving the results of one app to be read in by a follow on app seems very clunky to me. Can we develop a method to use the results within a workflow to feed drop down lists in later stages in the same workflow? That way an app can stand on it's own without having to save files out and chain further apps to read them again.
It seems this only works for selecting fields to include in the output but not for list of values to feed to a drop down list.
Can you add the search functionality in the dropdown (Apps) where the user enters specific text and the dropdown list gets filtered accordingly?
It would enhance the user's experience while using large lists in dropdown.
I would like to see a time interface tool similar to the Date and Numeric Up Down tools. I am working on some macros where the user can select the time they would like to use a filter for the data.
Example: I want all data loaded after 5:00 PM because its late and needs to be removed.
Example 2: I want to create an app where the user can select what time range they would like to see records for (business hours, during their shift, etc)
Currently this require 2-3 numeric up downs or a Text box with directions for the user on how to format field with Error tools to prevent bad entries. It could even be UTC time.
It would be great if we could set the default size of the window presented to the user upon running an Analytic App. Better yet, the option to also have it be dynamically sized (auto-size to the number of input fields required).
Pardon the length of this post, but I have been working with Alteryx since version 2.0 (11 years) and have been accumulating a wish list ever since. Some of these suggestions have been made in the past but have yet to be embraced. This is the first post for the first 'idea' but, as I said, this is a wish list that has grown since I was first introduced to Alteryx. More posts will follow.
I will break this into sections to hopefully make the suggestions easier to categorize and digest.
Application interface - Since I was introduce to Alteryx, the application interface (what is presented to users) has remained rather stagnant and, with the rumored push to adopt HTML as a replacement for pcxml, could benefit from the following additional settings. I suggest these based on the fact that dot Net classes for interface controls are readily available in Windows which allow for manipulation of each of the controls attributes.
1. The ability to set 'style' attributes for each of the interface tools in the application interface (font-family, font-style, font-size, font-weight, color, etc. This could be presented to the developer as an additional (perhaps optional button) in the Configuration panel for each interface tool as below:
These settings would be specific to the type of interface tool and to how the individual tool would layout and/or be styled relative to the application interface window. One layout option, applicable to most interface tools, would be where the label would be relative to the object itself (top, bottom, left, right). The CSS could be stored in and interpreted from the XML of the yxwz file referencing the ToolID of the Node in a section of the XML hierarchy called <CSS> or something standard. An option to alter the default CSS could be displayed with a radio button control so that if not selected, the tool would fallback to the default system CSS of the tool. This default could also be set in System settings so that a consistent interface could be defined across the enterprise.
2. Moving to the actual window that displays when the application is opened, a lot of the same concepts could be applied to the Interface Designer pane.
Attributes that could be set could include position on screen when opened, width and height of the window, and all the attributes of a dot Net form. The same radio button strategy used for individual interface tools could be employed to use or not use system defaults.
3. In the UI, it would be nice if there was additional flexibility in how the interface tools could be laid out. Along with the relative position of labels for each control, being able to layout controls horizontally as well as vertically would allow for a more organized interface.
The Radio buttons would work as normal with the Text Box controls inside each Radio button and only displaying when the button is selected.
I realize a lot of the current development in Alteryx is focused on the new Alteryx Connect and being able to attach to more data files and services. But, if there is still also a concerted effort to move from what could be considered a legacy proprietary mark up language, pcxml, to a more robust and universally accepted mark up, html and css, then, in my humble opinion, expanding the options for developers to design more user friendly and customizable applications to a standard 'style' across the enterprise, both on the desktop and in the gallery, is a worthy endeavor.
Thanks for your attention. More to follow.
One thing I have noticed is that for some of the end-users of the apps I have in the gallery is that running the app from server is enough of a barrier that they don't use it at all. I have had to send links repeatedly to gallery, to apps on server for them to run them.
What I would love is a way to create a custom desktop icon (bear with me - I don't have the lexicon.) that an end-user would open and it would launch the app in the server directly (I'm assuming this would be opening a browser of choice, opening the app/workflow to the screen where it gives you the option to 'Run/Download/Schedule' rather than accessing it through a shared collection in the Gallery through a browser.
Possible extensions of this are the ability to create an app for a mobile device where they can access an app/workflow on server directly to run it from a phone/ipad.
For a improved presentation of the GUI elements (Inteface Tools), may be to use for an Analytic App.
It would be great if it were possible to position the Interface Tools also side by side, instead of one above the other.
Hi Alteryx Devs -
It would be *really tight* to have a drop down interface tool that would support auto completion based on a odbc connection to a table/column or ajax call. I recently had a situation wherein we need to give the users the ability to select an address, then run a workflow. But the truth is, our address data is terrible, and what I really needed was to be able to let the users start typing the address, then give them a list of choices to pick from, they pick the correct (but usually wrongly formatted) address, and then I send that value into the workflow.
I could not find a decent way to give a gallery user a reliable way to pick an address from our list, so eventually wound up having to write an ajax piece to handle the auto completion, capture the user input, then post to a service that would in turn, interact with gallery through the API, get the response, and send it back calling page, and back to the user. A significant amount of work to put into something that is an exceedingly common web operation of auto completion.
This would make a lot of gallery operations flow so much more naturally.
Thanks for listening!
This should be a simple addition:
In the same way that many default tools automatically generate annotations when they are dropped into the workflow, or their configurations are modified, there should be a way to add custom annotations for custom made macros.