We have discussed on several occasions and in different forums, about the importance of having or providing Alteryx with order of execution control, conditional executions, design patterns and even orchestration.
I presented this idea some time ago, but someone asked me if it was posted, and since it was not, I’m putting it here so you can give some feedback on it.
The basic concept behind this idea is to allow us (users) to have:
This approach involves some functionalities that are already within the product (like exploiting Filtering logic, loading & saving, caching, blocking among others), exposed within a Tool Container with enhanced attributes, like this example:
The approach is to extend Tool Container’s attributes.
This proposition uses actual functionalities we already have in Designer.
So, basically, the Tool Container gets ‘superpowers’, with the addition of some capabilities like: Accepting input data, saving the contents within the container (to create a design pattern, or very commonly used sequence of tools chained together), output data, run the contents of the tools included in the container, etc.), plus a configuration screen like:
This should end a brief introduction to the idea, but taking it a little further, it will allow even to have something like an Orchestration layout, where the users can drag and drop containers or patterns and orchestrate them in a solution, like we can do with the Visual Layout Tool or the Interactive Chart tool:
I'm looking forward to hear what you think.
This has probably been mentioned before, but in case it hasn't....
Right now, if the dynamic input tool skips a file (which it often does!) it just appears as a warning and continues processing. Whilst this is still useful to continue processing, could it be built as an option in the tool to select a 'error if files are skipped'?
Right now it is either easy to miss this is happening, or in production / on server you may want this process to be stopped.
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.
Love the new updates to the Browse tool in 2019.2! However, if you choose the option Open results in new window, which I do often so I can see my whole dataset, the search/filter/sort functionality goes away. Would be great if that new functionality also worked in the new window. Thanks!
Can't wait for the new base maps!
In-app screens, lot of space is wasted because components/tools can just be stacked one below the other.
It would great if we could also insert them horizontally.
Tags : screen, app, macro, layout, tools, UI
I would like to be able to add an in-house built Calgary db to the list of data sources in the pull down on the Calgary Input tool. A customer database, for example.
In the picture you can see the Kalibrate Technologies Traffic Counts and TomTom US Address Points in the pull down. I would like to add my own Calgary db to the list of choices.
Love the functionality to create filters on the Calgary database but it would be nice to be able to select the columns you wanted returned. There are times where you only want a couple columns but the input tool will return all columns creating a larger dataset then required. You can add a select right after the input but this is after the entire dataset has been loaded into memory. Combining the two would make the Calgary input tool behave more like a database then a standard "dumb" input source.
In my environment, installing Core Data Bundle to network drive ("prepare a network install") runs for hours or days due to network factors. If interrupted, I need to start from scratch again.
These changes would greatly improve the installation:
Could we please have the option of selecting the fields, like the join tool, within the Calgary Join tool? It is especially problematic when I simply want to assign spatial object name to a point; i.e customers within a DMA or sales territory.
This would be agreat addition within the ConsumeView Matching tool as well.
As a GIS department, we use numerous spatial datasets on a daily basis. Many of these are quite large and we are looking for ways to optimize their performance. Right now, we are forced to use an indexed folder system to increase performance, but we would like to move to Calgary databases. The problem is, that Calgary databases only hold point features which limits the number of our datasets that we can use it with. If we could spatially index line and polygon features as well, that would dramatically increase the usefulness of a Calgary database.
I have not found this function or a workaround, only as "recent connections" which normally, are not saved on Virtual Machines.
This would save the time it takes to find the path/folder where Calgary DBs are saved.
if this has been proposed or fixed already, please delete this idea!
When choosing "In List" values in a CYDB input, the normal Windows functions do not work (shift+click, ctl+A, ctl+click, etc.).
When having to choose, say, 20 values, it is a big annoyance to have to click each value (20 clicks).
Have been told this is a bug so I wanted to put it on your radar for a fix.
As with Output Data tool, it would be very helpful to have this option within the Calgary Loader tool. I have a series of ordered analytic apps and if I could name the Calgary database using the "Take File/Table Name from Field" option I would be able to chain the apps and be much more efficient.
Our team works with a lot of in-house transaction data sets that have been put into a calgary database. It would be much easier to build apps that use the calgary input tool without having to configure html code.
A great feature would be for CASS to provide the address type as Residential or Business. Better yet, further breakdown of address type into single-family, apartment, retail, office, commercial, warehouse, etc. This would be very beneficial when analyzing address data from the Tom Tom Address Points Calgary database and can allow a end-user to filter prioritize addresses in their analysis based on the type of address.
Occasionally, the Calgary Loader tool will not write out all fields passed to it. This seems to happen after writing out a certain number of fields then later, when rerunning, adding a new output field. Very annoying because you don't know it will happen until processing is complete and you examine the result. I usually manually delete the calgary files prior to rerunning, to avoid the versioning, but it still happens.
Also, please make the versioning optional with a check box, default off.