Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas

The Input Data tool has a "Field Length" option for CSV files. The default is 254 characters. In most cases, this is woefully inadequate. I tend to add several zeroes to the end to prevent truncation. When I don't remember to do this, I get flooded with conversion errors:

"Input Data (2) The field "hours" was truncated in record #38"

I want to set a global default, that I can override per tool, for length so I don't have to do this every time.

Be able to have a round function similar to Excel's Round Function. Basically, be able to round "5 and up" or "4 and down" based on the number of decimal spaces we choose. This would be similar to what is taught in grade school and would resolve 80% to 90% of the rounding issues in Alteryx. Most of rounding solutions provided are too technical and worthless. This is very basic and common sense. (FYI - I don't know if this helps, but I believe Excel only goes out to 13 decimal places before cutting it off, maybe if Alteryx could do the same with the rounding it would be helpful. 

Currently I'm pulling the exact same data through two different workflows, and getting two different amounts slightly off from each even though both use the same raw data source and datatype.  

Please could we add Qubole to supported data sources,

https://www.qubole.com/

It is possible to connect to Qubole via ODBC Connection

However, this error message is often returned on a query: InboundNamedPipe GetOverlappedResult: The pipe has been ended 

I've been advised by Alteryx Support that this is likely due to the ODBC driver. 

If it's possible to add Qubole to supported data sources it would save a lot of time committed to troubleshooting this error.

All the best

I've seen several posts and questions concerning NULL dates.  Is 09/31/2010 a valid date?  I know that 02/29/206 isn't valid and that 02/00/2006 isn't either, but I really don't like finding out about these in conversion warning messages.

I might suggest a function that returns True or False on the date check and let the user configure appropriate rules to rethink the attempted date prior to committing the field to the date data type.

Cheers,

Mark

I suggest that it would be beneficial to add in a column filter that can automatically remove columns based on a condition, such as removing columns where all values are NULL or if they contain something in the values.

Should have a True and False output, like the normal Filter tool, so you can check what is being removed.

e.g. Would help with when you get poorly formatted excel sheets that add in hundreds of redundant columns, or if your workflow has generated NULL columns that should be removed, without having to Transpose, Filter, Cross tab etc to clear them out.

Thanks,

Doug

Products Team: Could you tell me if this is on the future road map or not?

It's something that other software does utilize, and I've seen similar requests on this message board.

Many companies use per period, quarter, year, etc. that aren't equal lengths or same days each month.

By saying every 364 days, you can schedule a yearly report. If your 4 quarters are unequal length, you can schedule 4 times (1st day of each quarter) at 364 days, recurring.

We have lengths of every 28 days for monthly reports (not 30/31). Or every 90 days. Or 180 days. Or every 14 days.

Being able to Schedule Every N Days moves you from owning a scheduler, to a providing a Competitive Scheduler.

Hello,

In Alteryx Designer application, in User Settings, please add an option for us to check/uncheck whether we would like to show/hide the Splash Screen upon app launch.

Thanks!

The Python tool has been a tremendous boon in being able to add capability that is not yet available in the Alteryx platform.

It would make the Python Tool much more usable and useful if you can define the inputs explicitly rather than just relying on the good behaviour of both the user; and also the python code that reads the inbound data (Alteryx.Read('#1'))

This is not something that the Jupyter notebook code-interface may handle directly (because the Jupyter notebook has no priveledged knowledge of the workflow outside it); so this may be best handled by the container itself.

The key here is that if my python app requires 2 inputs - it should be possible to define these explicitly so that we can test; and also so that we can prevent errors and make this more bullet-proof.

The same would apply on the outbound nodes for the Python tool.

For example I have an ERROR MESSAGE tool that is rather verbose.  I chose to modify the annotation as:  ZIP Code Check.  I presumed that the result would simply be "ZIP Code Check", but Alteryx added that to the beginning of the annotation rather than replacing the whole annotation.  I reported this as a bug, but was told that this was designed to operate in this manner.  It was suggested that I bring this out as a "New Idea" to the community for review.  If you agree that the tools should operate in a similar fashion for annotation (or other actions) across the pallet, please STAR this.  Otherwise, I'm happy to hear your feedback.

Thanks,

Mark

The reporting tools do not currently support HTML structured or unstructured lists https://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_ul.asp

All vertical combination creates tables which group the lines together.    Even if you manually create this - you get an error saying that ul (or ol or il) are not supported in composer

This creates a challenge in 2 ways:

a) When creating lists in reporting outputs - you lose the functionality of structured lists (numbering with letters; numbers etc)

b) additionally - selecting the text in tables behaves differently than selecting data that is created in lists.

Please could you add the ability to create lists in addition to tables in the reporting tools by supporting the ol; ul; and il tags?

NOTE: this could initially be done just by supporting the tags; and then later this could be a summarize option on the summarize tool; and a bullet option in the text tool.

Summarize using tablesdesired: summarise using listsList rendered with the list tags

Before Designer 2019.4 there was a "bug" in the workflow statistics collection that under the "SampleModule" data from the UsageGallery collection the name of the workflow run from within Designer was available.  We used that information to determine the common workflows run in our community as well as generating a measure of community growth.  The "bug" was removed in 2019.4 and now we can only determine the number of runs, but not the number of distinct workflows that were run.  This idea to do return the workflow name run to the information stored in the Mongo database.

Some of us work in teams to build complex workflows, resulting in various versions that have to be stitched together. It would be amazing to have the workflow on a shared drive and have a mode where multiple users can build, review, and modify simultaneously. (This was one of the biggest sells for our company migration from Microsoft Office to Google suite). 

This would promote collaboration, learning, and more efficient and quality driven workflows. 

I enjoy using Alteryx. It saves me a lot of time compared to manually writing scripts. But one of my frustrations is the lack of 'intelligence' in the IDE. Please make it so that if I change a name of a column in a select tool or a join, every occurence of that variable/column in selects, summarises, formulae and probably all tools downstream of the select tool renames as well. In other IDEs I believe this is called refactoring. It doesn't seem like an big feature to make, it would save enormous amounts of time and would make me very happy.

While we're on the 'intelligence' of the IDE, there is a small, easily fixable bug. When I have a variable with spaces in the middle, for example, 'This is my column name', and start writing in the code field "[Thi" then the drop downbox suggests "[This is my column name]". All good so far. But if I get a little further in the variable name, and write instead "[This i", then the dropdown box suggests "[This is my column name]", and I click this, the result is this: "[This [This is my column name]". Alternatively, I could write "[This is my col" and the result would be "[This is my [This is my column name]". Clearly this could be avoided by my using column names with underscores or hyphens; but I wanted to highlight to you the poor functionality here.

Kind regards,

Ben Hopkins

Hello - the added feature to show the designer tool detail of the four highly used tools (Join, Formula, Filter, and Summarize tool) is an incredible addition to Connect functionality. Can this functionality expand to the In-DB version of the same tools? We leverage In-DB when possible to utilize the processing power of the database. Adding this as well to Connect would be a huge benefit to see the complete picture of a workflow.

For deeply structured XML - it would be very helpful to be able to search XML (as you would using the DOM).     Even better would be to implement XML Query capability (a visual tool) within Alteryx so that XML data can be directly queried: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XQuery

As Alteryx becomes more focussed on the Enterprise - it is important that we build capabilities that support the needs of large-scale BI.

One of these critical needs is dealing with heterogeneous data from different systems that use different IDs for every critical entity / concept (e.g. client; product)

Here's the example:

Problem:

- In any large enterprise - there are several thousand different line-of business systems

- Each of these was probably built at a different time, and uses a different key for specific concepts - like Client & Product

- Most large enterprises that I've worked at do not have a pre-built way of transforming these codes so...

- This means that any downstream analytics finds it almost impossible to give single-view-of-customer or single-view-of-product.

Solution option A:

Reengineer all upstream systems.   Not feasible

Solution option B: 

Expect some reference-data team to fix this by building translations.   More feasible but not fast

Remaining Solution Option:

Just as Kimball talked about - the only real way is to define a set of enterprise dimensions, which are the defined master-list of critical concepts that you need to slice-and-dice by (client; product; currency; shipping method; etc) in a way which is source-system agnostic

Then you need a method in the middle to transform incoming data to use these codes.   This process is called "Conforming"

What would this look like in Alteryx?

Setup

• We would use the connect product to define a new dimension - say "Product".
• Give this a unique ID which is source-system independant; and then add on the attributes that are important for analytics (product type; category; manufacturer; etc)
• Then decide how to handle change (slowly changing dimension or SCD type 0,1,2, etc).   Alteryx should take full responsibility for managing this SCD history; as do many of the competitors
• We then create a list of possible synonym types (within Connect).   For example - a product may have a synonym ID from your supplier; from your ERP system; from your point of sale system.  that's 3 different IDs for any product.
• We then load up the master data - this is painful but necessary

In Use:

• I read in data into alteryx via any input tool
• I bring in a "Conforming" tool off the toolbox (new tool which is needed)
• It asks me which column or columns I wish to conform
• For each - it asks me which synonym type to use
• It then adds a translated column for me to use which ties back to the enterprise dimension - and spits out the errors where the synonym is necessary.

Impact:

In BI in smaller contexts, or quick rapid-fire BI - you don't have to worry about this.   But as soon as you go past a few hundred line-of-business systems and are trying to do enterprise reporting, you really have to take this serious.   This is a HUGE part of every BI persons's role in a large enterprise - and it is painful; slow and not very rewarding.   If we could create this idea of a simple-to-use and high-velocity conforming process - this would absolutely tear the doors off enterprise BI - and no-one else is doing this yet!

+ @AshleyK @BenG @NickJ @ARich @patrick_digan @JoshKushner @samN @Ari_Fuller @Arianna_Fuller 

Hi Alteryx Designer Dev Team,

There are times where you want to create a variation of a particular pipeline and the data transformations in the beginning of the pipeline are similar but need slightly different configurations. To save time, can we have a right-click context option for each tool to be able to copy/paste or duplicate tool with existing configuration. This saves time by only having to change a few options in the duplicated tool. This is common for tools like, input, output, joins, groupings and reporting tools. An example where this functionality is handy in reporting: you may have a particular way that you always do your charts and instead of configuring the chart options from scratch each time, you copy paste the chart tool with current configuration and then you only have to make minor changes such as the data connections. 

Thank you

Data profiling feature in the Browse tool is a great feature, however, when your working with an extremely large data set, it can a large amount of time to fully render.

My idea is if Alteryx can make a pre-determination whether the data is so large that it'll take a substantial amount of time to profile the data. If it does, to not profile immediately, rather, display a message where the profile info would be letting the user know that it may take a while to generate with a "Generate Profile" button if the user needs to see it.

Another option would be to only profile a sample of the data and present the user an option to profile everything.

Thanks,

Jimmy

I recently had an error in a module because an expected variable was not present coming into a formula tool.  My variable, "MONDAY" was not present and the formula MONDAY/3 failed.  The workaround was to union all days into the incoming data and things worked fine.  I would have liked to have an Excel formula like this instead:

IF ISERROR([Monday]/3) THEN 0 ELSE [Monday]/3 ENDIF

Thanks