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.
Taking inspiration how you work with Jupyter notebooks and use the notebook to show your workings, wouldn't it be great if you could document your workflows directly on the canvas more in a notebook style.
I think this essentially can be summarised down into two features:
1) Markdown functionality in the comment tool
2) Ability to import results from IRG and / or browse tool directly into the canvas.
I have mocked up a version of what this could look like in the screenshot below.
Overall I think it would improve the experience of documenting workflows as you can show your workings in-line while building the workflow. Plus it solves the debate around team vertical vs team horizontal as you build using both!
Many users will probably follow best practice style guides with Alteryx to use comment boxes under tools to describe in detail what is happening with these tools - such as this one shared by @BenMoss.
However a limitation of this is the comment boxes do not move with the tools, so if you have a well documented workflow but then need to add a new tool, you need to adjust all the spacing and re-align the tools, which with a large workflow can be time consuming.
Therefore the improvement would be to have an ability to lock comment boxes to individual tools (similar to a group function in Office).
I didn't have a clue where to post this. That is why I am sharing it here.
A small portion of the community users are content creators\community builders\people active on social media. Let's take me, for example. I am writing yammer announcements about Alteryx to our internal user group in my current company.
One of the materials that I recently started to share are weekly challenges, and I know other Alteryx communities that are internal often share them weekly.
I would love to have an opportunity to copy-paste some announcements that someone from Alteryx would prepare.
Please see the screenshot below as a reference:
The only thing that I would add is information about the level of difficulty + Main subject. In similar manner, to what we see on the weekly challenge index:
If this would be posted on the same topic week over week, community builders like me could follow a threat and copy paste a new post weekly.
At the same time, if someone would like to post it on social media. They can always showcase them on the network.
More information about Alteryx in many sources for almost free.
You must upvote this idea 😄
When building a workflow with testing tools, you tend to want to be able to put these in container and then minimise this to improve readability of the workflow.
For example instead of this:
You might want to minimise the error checks like this:
However when running apart from reading through the results window, there is no immediate indicator that there is a tool inside the container that has errored:
So the feature enhancement request is to add in an exclamation marker to show the user that a tool inside has an error and you can then easily open it up and investigate further.
Please add official support for newer versions of Microsoft SQL Server and the related drivers.
According to the data sources article for Microsoft SQL Server (https://help.alteryx.com/current/DataSources/SQLServer.htm), and validation via a support ticket, only the following products have been tested and validated with Alteryx Designer/Server:
Microsoft SQL Server
Validated On: 2008, 2012, 2014, and 2016.
This is one of the most popular data sources, and the lack of support for newer versions (especially a 2+ year old product like Sql Server 2017) is hard to fathom.
ODBC Driver for SQL Server/SQL Server Native Client
Validated on ODBC Driver: 11, 13, 13.1
Validated on SQL Server Native Client: 10,11
Having the ability to call-out via ARROWS/SYMBOLS (gold star) would be nice without requiring the user to create images and call them to the canvas. This makes the workflow even more readable.
Watermarks (e.g. DRAFT, AMP, Do NOT AMP, FINAL) would be useful on the canvas as well.
When using the output data tool, it would save me and my cluttered organizational skills a lot of effort if the writing workflow was saved as part of the yxdb metadata.
I've often had to search to find a workflow which created the yxdb. I tend to use naming conventions to help me, but it would be easier if the file and or path was easily found.
When viewing results of a workflow that has Errors, could we add External error resolution data if the user clicks on the error message? Like browse everywhere it could lookup the error in help and in community posts.
Often as I am scraping web sites, some clever developer has put an invisible character (ASCII or Unicode) in the data which causes terrible trouble.
I've identified 89 instances of zero-width or non-zero-width glyphs that are not visible and/or Alteryx does not classify as whitespace. There are probably more, but Unicode is big y'all.
Unfortunately, the Trim() string function only removes 4 of these characters (Tab, Newline, Carriage Feed, and Space).
REGEX_REPLACE with the \s option (which is what the Cleanse macro uses) is a little better but still only removes 20. And it removes all instances, not just leading and trailing.
I've attached a workflow which proves this issue.
@apolly: this is what I mentioned at GKO.
And I did see this post (https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Discussions/Elegantly-remove-all-ASCII-characters-...), but it's too brute force. Especially as Alteryx is localized and more users need those Unicode characters.
At the moment containers either expand and overlap other tools, or you have to leave space for them (defeating the original purpose of using them). Is there a way we can have the containers expansion shift the workflow so the others tools shift down / right to account for this expanision?
Dear Alteryx GUI Gang,
I'll create a container and then customize the colours, margins, transparency, border and then want consistency for other containers. It would be nice to have a format painter function (brush) to apply the format of one container to another. This of course could be extended to other tools like comments. There might be a desire to apply this to more tools too, but the comments and containers would be my focus as they are almost always custom configured.
In order to make the interface tools more accessable - please could you add explicit documentation to the help-text that explains how the data is returned to the canvas?
For example - the text input tool is documented here: https://help.alteryx.com/2019.3/QuestionTextBox.htm
What is missing from this is whether the multi-line version will provide the data to the canvas as a semi-colon delimited; comma delimited; newline delimited etc?
Would be very valuable if the documentation could explicitly define how the output of checkboxes; multiline textboxes; tree views etc are passed to the action tool.
It would be useful to have the WorkflowName captured as one of the default Engine constants. The WorkflowDirectory is included so why not the WorkflowName as well?
I often have to use configuration files to pass in values to workflows meaning the workflow name needs to be manually entered into the workflow, either as a text input or User Constant, which feels like an unnecessary step as Alteryx must know the name of the workflow once it has been saved.
Hello Alteryx Support,
I’m a Business Analytics Manager at Evernorth. My team and I use Alteryx Designer 2020.2 x64 for daily data preparation + analytic purposes; primarily, the desktop version but also have access to the company Alteryx Server ‘Gallery’ as well. Recently, we ran into a challenge and after asking around we still couldn’t find a solution.
We are seeking a solution to ‘add an example link’ in our custom built macro.
We don’t have the proper permissions to save and/or write to the “C:” designated folder location required to host the file as specified within the Alteryx Community help documentation (e.g. outlined below). --> We understand this is an internal IT obstacle that will take time to work out from a corporate data governance perspective, which is why we are seeking Alteryx Support.
At the end of the day, we are reaching out to see if your team can help us understand if there are alternative solutions that we can explore. Making the assumption, that is…that we can’t take the suggested approach in the documentation. See below for details about what we are trying to achieve.
Current macro state (…as viewed by Alteryx Designer users in the user-interfaces top tool panel for viewable macros):
Desired future macro state:
What we currently know: (According to…How to add an example link in the custom tool - Alteryx Community)
Path to the workflow
Thanks for your support and consideration to create a feature enhancement that allows Alteryx Designer users to 'add an example link to their custom tool' without having to go to the C:\ file location in order for it to work!
It is just a bit of annoyance, really. I'd like to see the option of inputting a hexcode of color and/or a screen color picker in the color dialog. At the moment, you have to change R, G, B separately or play around with the cursor to find the right color.
The color dialog is relevant for the documentation purposes but also reporting tools and I'm sure it would make life easier to some people, especially when branding colours are important.
After hitting "Test" in Workflow Dependencies:
Failed result = Bold red text (and a message)
Success result = Nothing?
Maybe we could get bold green letting us know that the test completed successfully.
The select tool does a great job at flagging up when something has changed from its original state. However why does this not happen with the checkboxes to keep or remove a field? It would be much faster and easier to read if we could have the same color conditional formatting as the rest.
// This is my new formula MAX([Price] * [Quantity],0) // This was my old formula // [Price] * [Quantity]
Imagine being able to SELECT your text block (could be many lines) and right-clicking to see an option to Comment or Un-Comment those configuration statements. I thought that you'd like it too.
I love using containers, but depending on how I am moving around the workflows or trackpad (when traveling) I find it hard to navigate quickly getting a container on the canvas between either add a container from the tool palette or having to highlight the tools and right-click for menu navigation to add the container. This ranks up there with the hotkeys for aligning the tools which make for quick work of making the workflow look organized and presentable.
To get simple information from a workflow, such as the name, run start date/time and run end date/time is far more complex than it should be. Ideally the log, in separate line items distinctly labelled, would have the workflow path & name, the start date/time, and end date/time and potentially the run time to save having to do a calculation. Also having an overall module status would be of use, i.e. if there was an Error in the run the overall status is Error, if there was a warning the overall status is Warning otherwise Success.
Parsing out the workflow name and start date/time is challenge enough, but then trying to parse out the run time, convert that to a time and add it to the start date/time to get the end date/time makes retrieving basic monitoring information far more complex than it should be.