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
Idea to have the option to include the workflow "meta info" (last tab of the workflow configuration when clicking on the cavas) when printing the workflow.
The Meta Info desciption and author sections would be particularly of value. Currently on the long file name is embedded in the header.
When building workflows, it would be nice to have "Save Workflow" and "Run Workflow" added to the right click menu when in the canvas.
Add to Right Click menu:
The "Field Summary" tool and several others have a configuration requirement that provides a list of fields to select or deselect. The selection action is singular meaning you can only effect the action on one item in the list of many. As the number of fields we work with grows significantly this becomes a time consuming and tedious task.
This should be enhanced to allow highlighting of multiple fields to select or deselect as we can do in tools like the "Select" tool.
The field summary tool is an excellent resource to get an overview of the data and spot targets for analysis or data cleansing.
Unfortunately it has limitations either in the number of fields included or some combination of the number of fields and one or more of its attributes. There is nothing in the documentation I found to make a user aware of this. When you exceed N fields selected the system just hangs, indicating it is running but there is no connection progress shown and nothing seems to happen, even if you limit input to 1 record.
Through trial and error I found an approximate limit in number of fields I can include and still have it work.
I request that Alteryx update the tool help info and devise enhancements to dynamically load balance the tool so it can scale to the number of fields requested or at least warn when the limit is reached or approached. The latter warning could be similar to the red font warnings in the formula tool when you have a malformed expression. However a load balancing version is most desired.
The issue as it stands results in users wasting a lot of time trying to make the tool work as expected, then report it to support as an apparent bug in the tool which can be argued both ways.
I realize in the real world there are limits but in this real world we are seeing the number of fields to analyze increase significantly, especially when you have a data license and integrate 3rd party data to you own native data adding a hundred or hundreds more fields.
How about adding the ability to split intersecting trade areas at the points of intersection to create two new spatial objects. The two objects could then be used to process customer records and divide them into "territories" based on the line of intersection.
I tried importing a file into my text input tool and I ran across this error.
Why is there a limit? Can we get rid of it since we're not living in DOS anymore.
I am trying to use the Dynamic Replace to selectively update records in a set of variables from survey data. That is, I do not have all potential values in the “R” input of Dynamic Replace. Instead, I have a list of values that I would like altered from their current values by respondent (RespondentID) and question # (Q#). Currently, when I run the workflow, any Q#/ResponseID combos that are not in my “R” input are replaced with blanks. However, I would like an option that maintains the original data if there is nothing to replace the data with. Without this option, there are few (I'm still working on some ways) workarounds to ensure the integrity of the data.
The community could benefit from easier integration of splitting and applying functions to grouped data. The summarize tool is great for splitting your data and applying summary statistical functions. It would be super useful to take that block just one step further, and allow users to apply any other (aggregate) function to their grouped data instead of just the built-in functions in the summarize tool. I would envision that aggregate function either being a custom function that is a combination of existing user-specified functions within Alteryx (e.g. in the formula tool) and/or even an interface that allows you to use other Alteryx macros on the grouped data.
Apply user-defined functions, or other powerful Alteryx macros to grouped and data is a very common operation in the data analyst's daily workflows and being able to apply them without reverting to batch/iterative macros in a seamless manner would be naturally helpful.
During execution the user cannot scroll around. Large workflows need to be shrunk to very small icons to be able to follow the progress. Either have an option to automaticaly center on the active icon or allow scrolling during execution.
I would love to be able to double-click on an input or output file and have the file open. Second to that would be a clickable hyperlink to the filepath that could be used to open the file, or a "go to" button or something. Anything would be better than my current process of copying and pasting the filepath into an explorer window.
I think it would be nice to have the possibility to select which fields will output fo the distance tool.
When calculating distances for between large dataset, I do not always want my to 2 set of points has par of the output and would like to drop them directly in the tool.
When giving a user a dropdown list, it is difficult to give them an option of the data in a specific column. So if I have a "State" column, I would like to give the user a dropdown of all of the states currently represented in the table. So if there was "Nebraska, Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota", the dropdown list would give them an option to select Nebraska, Iowa, Kansas, and South Dakota. This could be useful on both List boxes and Dropdown lists. Currently there is a workaround that lets you do it, but it is not a great solution because if there is a space (Like in South Dakota), it puts an underscore in it so parsing is required.
Alteryx crashed when I attempted to use a custom OTF font in Report Text. I thought it was supported because font options was not greyed out and preview window looked correct and I was able to resize. I clicked 'Apply' and Alteryx popup window appeared saying "only TTF font is supported". Then Alteryx crashed.
Please add OTF font support. Tableau and other packages already support it.
I'm not sure if this is the right forum for a bug report, but I just solved one that has been bugging me for ages. Of the six key commands to hide and reveal the various panels, only five work, and now I know why.
Apparently the 'Results' panel used to be the 'Output' panel? I found some outdated docs that mentioned Crtl + Alt + O to open/hide the Output panel. Sure enough, the reason Ctrl + Alt + R doesn't work in the current version is that, in spite of what the menu text says, it's O that is still mapped to that panel, and not R.
I only discovered this after making sure none of my other installed apps were stealing that key combination. Thank you, process of elimination.
It would be helpful to have one of the following methods to disable output modules to prevent overwriting output files each time a workflow is run:
- A global 'Disable All Output Modules' option, which would effectively mute the workflow without removing any connections
- A module-specific 'disable/enable this module' option, to the same end
Our DAT file structure is as follows:
The first line of the .DAT file must be a header row identifying the field neames.
The .DAT file must use the following Concordance default delimiters:
Comma ASCII character (020)
Quote ASCII character (254)
Newline ASCII character (174)
I think that the sample tool should have a T or F port.
Lets say I want to keep first N records but would like to stream the rest of the data (the not sampled one) somewhere else in my workflow, its possible but it would be easier to have that in the sampler.
Currently only DateTime based functions are available, Time based functions should be introduced. like TimeAdd(), TimeDiff() etc.
This will help users a lot to calculate different aspects of time based calculations...
At the moment, we are not able to use input data field names and its values in Output tool, mainly in the Pre-SQL and Post-SQL statement. I see some discussions on this in the community and in many scenarios we require that. It will be great if we have this option.
As a method of deploying preprocessing and ML models it would be awesome to be able to convert a workflow to java...
models are needed to be deployed into Complex event processes or decision systems. Even for SAS there is a need to implement the datastep algorithms and procs to run in JVM.
It is possible to convert a workflow into a PMML file and then use JMML package to convert that to Java. Yet the full workflow with all preprocessing alternatives and a series of ML methods may not be captured fully.
For SAS case here is a similar solution: http://www.dullesresearch.com/carolina-features/