This site uses different types of cookies, including analytics and functional cookies (its own and from other sites). To change your cookie settings or find out more, click here. If you continue browsing our website, you accept these cookies.
It would be helpful to be able to embed a macro within my workflows so in the end I have one single file.
Similar to how Excel becomes a macro enabled file, it would be great if the actual macro could be contained in the workflow. As it stands now, the macro that I insert into a workflow is similar to a linked cell in MS Excel that points to another file. If the macro is moved the workflow becomes broken. I often work on a larger workflow that I save locally while developing. Once it's complete, I then save the workflow to a network drive and have to delete the macros and reinsert these. It also makes it challenging if I were to send a workflow to someone else... I will have to give them instructions on which macros to insert and where. Similar to a container, they could be minimized so to speak to their normal icon, and then expanded/opened if any edits were needed....then collapsed when done.
The drop-down interface tool currently allows you to allow the user to select field names from a connected tool.
However, a very common use case is not currently supported - select VALUES from a connected too (i.e. the values in a specific column).
There are several workarounds (including chaining the app and using an alteryx DB or transposing values into fields) - however given how common this need is, it seems to be valuable to support this directly.
A common problem with the R tool is that it outputs "False Errors" like the following: "The R.exe exit code (4294967295) indicted an error"
I call this a false error because data passes out of the R script the same as if there were no error. As such, this error can generally be ignored. In my use case, however, my R tool is embedded within an iterative macro, and the error causes the iterator to stop running.
I was able to create a workaround by moving the R tool to a separate workflow and calling it from the CReW runner macro within my iterator, effectively suppressing the error message, but this solution is a bit clumsy, requires unnecessary read/writes, and uses nonstandard macros.
You could create an area under the Interface Designer - Properties when editing a macro that allows users to select the order the anchor abreviations will appear on the final macro. This is useful if we want an input or output to be at the top, for example. Currently, the only way is by deleting and adding them again on the corect order. Not user friendly. Thank you!
Macros are GREAT, huge timesavers, but nesting them is a royal pain.
I find I have to create the prompts of the nested macro again in the parent macro for them to be seen by the user. Could the future Alteryx sense any un-handled nested macro prompts and simply pass them through to the parent macro user interface?
Can we get the input tool to automatically convert long filenames to the 8.3 convention inside of a macro?
I've written a batch macro that individually opens files in order to trap files that fail to open. However, when I pass in really long file names it bombs because beyond some length the Input tool converts the path to 8.3 but that logic doesn't fire inside of my macro.
Example of filename: \\ccogisgc1sat\d$\Dropbox (Clear Channel Outdoor)\Mapping\BWI MapInfo\Workspaces\Local\AEs\Archives\Cara\Sunrise Senior Living\Washington+DC_Adults+55++With+HHI+Of+$75,000++Who+Are+Caregiver+Of+Aging+Parent_Relative+Or+Planning+To+Shop+For+Nursing+Care_Assisted+Living_Retirem.TAB
I would like to see In-DB batch macros, currently we are joining tables with 30 million+ records and we are having to run it through standards tools because we are unable to process via In-DB, which has a 20% improvement in processing speed based on the peformance profiling.
I am using a Dynamic Input within a Batch Macro to allow the user to read (dump) data from multiple Oracle tables with varying schemas. If a table read has 0 rows output, then an error message like the following is displayed at the end of the job execution:
Because it is always possible to return 0 rows from the read, I'd like to mute the error message. If this message is present, I don't want to STOP the macro/application. I do however want to stop the application if an ERROR Message that I care about is encountered (e.g. Output file is not defined).
I'm adding a 'Dynamic Input' tool to a macro that will dynmaically build the connection string based on User inputs. We intend to distribute this macro as a 'Connector' to our main database system.
However, this tool attempts to connect to the database after 'fake' credentials are supplied in the tool, returning error messages that can't be turned off.
In situations like this, I think you'd want the tool to refrain from attempting connections. Can we add a option to turn off the checking of credentials? I assume that others who are building the connection strings at runtime would also appreciate this as well.
As a corollary, for runtime connection strings, having to define a 'fake' connection in the Dynamic Input tool seems redundant, given we have already set the 'Change Entire File Path' option. There are some settings in the data connection window that are nice to be able to set at design time (e.g. caching, uncommitted read, etc.), but the main point of that window to provide the connection string is redundant given that we intend to replace it with the correct string at runtime. Could we make the data connection string optional?
To combine the above points, perhaps if the connection string is left blank, the tool does not attempt to connect to the connection string at runtime.
Idea: I think the Interface Designer's "Test View" window should allow control parameters to act like "Text Boxes" and allow the designer to manually edit, or type a control parameter for use in a debug module.
When designing batch macros, there currently is not an easy, built-in way to test or debug their functionality. There are two reasons to build a batch macro: 1) to reconfigure the macro at run time, just as if they were the answers to questions in the macro GUI; 2) to group the records going in the macro inputs into batches. If I am designing a macro to perform the 1st function -- reconfigure the macro at run time -- I need to be able to test its functionality in a debug module.
The Interface Designer's "Test view" window should provide this ability by allowing you to type an example control parameter value. However, the Test View window only allows you to "dropdown" to a value via a dropdown box. This dropdown box is always empty, thus never allowing you to enter a test control parameter. I think the Interface Designer's "Test View" window should allow control parameters to act like "Text Boxes" and allow the designer to manually edit a control parameter for a debug module.
I've attached a screenshot of a simple, two control parameter batch macro. As you can see, in the Interface Designer, I don't have a way of inputting a value in either control parameter field to open a debug module.
Here's a twist on the iterative macro. Suppose, like a generate rows tool, you could initialize a container to iterate on it's internal processes without having to construct a macro? The container could include anchors for iterations and for output and allow the user to DoWhile inside of the container.
There is currently no way to export interactive output from the network graph tool. I would like to be able to export a png of the static network graph image, a pdf of the report, and a complete html of the whole (which means including the JSON and vis.js files necessary for creating the report).