Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas

The "Manage Data Connections" tool is fantastic to save credentials alongside the connection without having to worry when you save the workflow that you've embedded a password. 

Imagine if - there were a similar utility to handle credentials/environment variables. 

• I could create an entry, give it a description, a username, and an encrypted password stored in my options, then refer to that for configurations/values throughout my workflows. 
  • Tableau credentials in the publish to tableau macro
  • Sharepoint Credentials in the sharepoint list connector
• When my password changes I only have to change it in one place
• If I handoff the workflow to another user I don't have to worry about scanning the xml to make sure I'm not passing them my password
• When a user opens my workflow that doesn't have a corresponding entry in their credentials manager they would be prompted using my description to add it.
• Entries could be exported and shared as well (with passwords scrubbed)

Example Entry Tableau:

Then when configuring a tool you could put in something like [Tableau Prod].[Password] and it would read in the value.

Or maybe for Sharepoint:

Or perhaps for a team file location:

Any of these values could be referenced in tool configurations, formulas, macro inputs by specifying the Alias and field.

Hello,

Enhancement of 'IN' functionality (ie. in Filter tool), so using range instead of citing particular values for example:
instead [ID] IN (1,2,3,52,53,54,100,101,102) something like that [ID] IN (1-3,52-54,100-102).

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).

Hello all,

In help, we can read that :
https://help.alteryx.com/current/designer/write-data-db-tool

Update/Delete is currently only supported for SQL Server ODBC connections.

 I don't know about you but SQL Server is well used in transactional workload but in analytics... well... I have only used once in several dozens of context !

Maybe it would be cool to make it work on many more database?

Best regards,

Simon

Hello all,

MonetDB is a very light, fast, open-source database available here :
https://www.monetdb.org/

Really enjoy it, works pretty well with Tableau and it's a good introduction to column-store concepts and analytics with SQL.

It has also gained a lot of popularity these last years :
https://db-engines.com/en/ranking_trend/system/MonetDB

Sadly, Alteryx does not support it yet.

Best regards

As an international organization we deal with clients in multiple-countries.

Name matches for names including Chinese characters generate a unicode conversation warning and are excluded from the fuzzy match.

It would be good if fuzzy match could be enhanced to handle Chinese characters.

Very often, I used a container to make notes about certain parts of the workflow. Some of the comments that I created are pretty long. Could the user have the possibility to have at least rows for the title of the container?

I have created a screen to show what I have in mind. Potentially users could have the ability to turn this option on or inside the container?

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:

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Ideas/Tab-from-Select-Column-to-Enter-Expression-H...

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Ideas/Formula-tool-data-type-should-be-prominent/i...

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Ideas/Alteryx-11-formula-tool-default-data-type/id...

Hello!
I appreciate this is a very underused element of Alteryx Functionality, however, I have noticed a few issues with the description of fields. 

Firstly, if you set a description on a field within a select tool:

And then attempt to clear the description later in the workflow (in another select tool), you cannot. When you delete the description, it will clear back to the original value (in this case, 'test'):

This can be easily recreated, and can be more applicable to yxdb outputs that contain the description of fields. In that scenario, you cannot go back to the previous select tool and remove the description. The closest you can come to easily clearing the description is replacing it with a space ' '.

As a secondary issue, as current the score tool removes field descriptions and overrides the source. For example if I open the Score tool example workflow, and add a select tool/description:

You can see the meta data going into the score tool:

But unfortunately the output of the tool looks like:

Showing that it has completely removes the descriptions, and also replaced all of the 'source' information. My suggestion for this would be that it would not replace the source information or descriptions.

Thirdly - and quite a niche issue, but an int64 field specifically will break when the description differs between the data and the model.

Again, easy to recreate within the Ccore tool example workflow. Apply a Select tool to both streams, setting 'First_Years' to an int64. Within the bottom stream (the model creation), set a description, in this case, 'test':

Make sure to leave the top streams description blank.

Run the workflow, observe the error:
Error: Score (106): Score: The variable testFirst_Years is missing from the input data stream.
Interestingly, it seems to be using the description as part of the name within the Score tool, which is causing issue when the descriptions differ. My suggestion for this would be that it would not utilise descriptions at all.

Kind Regards,

Owen

I think I'm liking the new UI, but I think it's necessary to bring back save, undo and re-do buttons....

1. Frequent saving of workflows is crucial and not everyone uses keyboard shortcuts

2. The ability to undo (lots) of changes is a key part of iterating and rapidly building workflows in Alteryx and again not everyone uses keyboard shortcuts to do this.

Looks like there's potentially space to add this to the right of 'help' (I suspect this might be technically quiet difficult) or to the left of 'run', 'schedule' and 'active documents' as seen in the image below.

Out of interest, where has the 'documents' terminology come from?

Currently, when a new version of Alteryx Designer is released, you get a banner at the top of your Designer to upgrade. You can manually select to disable this for up to 30 days. 

However, this is really causing issues with Server compatibility. Users get notified to upgrade, thinking it's from the Server owners and upgrade then is no longer compatible with Server. Alternatively, it causes differences between users, etc. 

It would be ideal that it would be disabled in general but also controlled when software is pushed to machines through IT policies.

Currently it's possible to use the Output tool to output to either a sheet, a place in a sheet or a named range in Excel, but it is not possible to output to a preformatted excel table - it would be really good if the output tool had an option to output to [Table1] in an Excel workbook for example. This enhancement would be incredibly helpful for reporting purposes.

in our organization people are moving away from network drives to BOX for file repository and they needs to use to connect to BOX using Alteryx as an Input and Output platform where they should be able to access files to read and write. 

Currently few of the users are able to use the BOX as a repository using BOX Sync tool (Map BOX as a network drive) but that is not at all useful when they try to save into a gallery and run or schedule on the gallery. A connector for BOX will be of great help. 

Hello all,

As you may know, Alteryx use the Active Query Builder component. However this component itself evolves with cool new features :
https://www.activequerybuilder.com/blog/2018-04-28-much-faster-visual-sql-query-building-in-the-new-...

You can also try the online demo

https://www.activequerybuilder.com/

Best regards,

Simon

After using the Text to Columns tool, I generally find myself using a Select tool to get rid of the original field that I split up. Could an option be added in the config to automatically delete this field once it is split to columns?

Please add support for Databricks' Unity Catalog

Currently, when selecting a Databricks-connection in the “Connect In-DB”-tool, and opening the “Query Builder”, only tables in the catalog named “hive_metastore” are listed. That is, Alteryx submits the following SQL query to Databricks:

Listing tables 'catalog : hive\_metastore, schemaPattern : %, tableTypes : null, tableName : %'

However, with Unity Catalog in Databricks the namespace is three-tier and there may be multiple catalogs (and not just the "hive_metastore" catalog), see https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/azure/databricks/lakehouse/data-objects#--what-is-a-catalog

I reached out to Alteryx support, which replied that you currently have a feature request for implementing this change (ID TDCB-4056) and they furthermore suggested that I post here.

Thanks in advance.

Note: This idea doesn't strictly fit into any given category as it involves enabling support for something that affects numerous aspects of Alteryx's already existing spatial features.

I live in Australia. As do a large number of your users. Like me, many of those users use Alteryx to process spatial data. There is only one problem; we live on a roving continent. Every year our continent shifts ever so slightly but over time that shift becomes significant. For this reason we have our own continental system of spatial coordinate projections. It's called the Geocentric Datum of Australia or GDA.

Since 2000, the official Australian geodetic datum has been GDA94.  However, according to the Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping (ICSM), because the coordinates of features on our maps, such as roads, buildings and property boundaries (and so on), are all based on GDA94, they do not change over time. This is why they have since adopted a new datum: GDA2020. This has now become the standard for mapping in Australia, bringing Australia’s national coordinates into line with global satellite positioning systems.

A more detailed explanation of this can be found on the ICSM's website: What is changing and why? | Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping (icsm.gov.au).

Of course Alteryx supports the more global WGS84 standard, which like GDA94 is a fixed datum. But there is up to a 1.8 metre discrepancy between GDA94 (and WGS84) and GDA2020. For spatial analysis projects that don't require metre accuracy that's not a problem. But imagine you are building a bridge, plotting the lanes of a road or programming a GPS enabled tractor. That 1.8 metre discrepancy between the real world coordinates and the projection is enough to cause problems. 

And it is. Which is why we request that Alteryx include support for GDA2020 in its existing selection of spatial projections.

This will enable spatial datasets configured in GDA2020 to not require conversion and thus risk corruption or error. This includes providing the ability to configure GDA2020 as the spatial projection in the input tool and all spatial tools.

Doing so would go a long way to supporting your ever growing Australian user base and maintaining Alteryx's position as a trusted software for processing spatial data.

I know that the container title/label should or can be short, and as much descriptive as possible. Also, adding extra comments inside the box helps to a more detailed explanation on regards what process is run inside the container. Visually, if I collapse the container, the "Short" title given can't be of much help.

Could it be possible to enhance the "caption" for the "Container" title? I mean to allow to type 2, 3 or more lines of text?. This will make the Container title more descriptive and visually will allow to have the containers collapsed but with a reasonable amount of text that describe (as much as possible) what happens inside the container.

At the moment, If I type certain amount of text, the container expands according to the length of the text 

Below is the typical container Title 

Below is the current situation if a person would like to give a bit of more description in the "Container" header (The container expands)

An dream would be to have the workflow with all containers collapsed and with titles that tell you what they do (see image below)

Alteryx Designer is slow when using In-DB tools.

We use Alteryx 2019.1 on Hive/HortonWords with the Simba ODBC Driver configured with SSL enabled.

Here is a compare In-DB / in Memory : 

We found that Alteryx open a new connection for each action : 

- First link to joiner = 1 connection.

- Second ling to joiner = 1 connection.

- Click on the canevas = 1 connection.

Each connection take about 2,5 sec... It really slow down the Designer : 

Please, keep alive the first connection instead of closing it and creating a new one for each action on the Designer.