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.
I would like to see a "tool" that you can use as an off-screen connection (pair) between data anchors. Currently, you can create "wireless" connections between anchors. This essentially helps, but isn't friendly if you add/modify contents between points A & B. It also doesn't aid in documentation of the workflow.
If by comparison, I put a connection tool on at point A it would be great to see it annotate itself with the incoming Tool ID and when I connect it to the paired point B, it would similarly explain the incoming tool id onto that point too.
I currently use a SELECT tool to explain visually that this data is being used elsewhere. I create a wireless connection to the receiving data (could be multiple) and document the source. The performance of the workflow may be slowed by these select tools.
I'm very open to other ideas or reformats of this proposal. I don't think that it is going to change the world, but it would help me with my OCD.
If possible I would like to see the Tool Palette Tabs automatically go onto a 2nd or even 3rd row if your screen isn't wide enough to show them all, and/or have the ability to order the Tool Palette Tabs yourself.
Most of the time I use IN/OUT, Preparation, Join & Transform... however I have set up my own Palette Tab for macros that I have made, but I find it a pain to keep scrolling left & right using the small arrow buttons
I could reduce the number of Tabs to fit onto one screen, but whilst learning and looking for tools which maybe useful to a particular task, I have most of them already open and ready.
With the ability to have this in any order you wish, so you can place your most frequently used Tabs on the top/bottom row, with your own Tab at the beginning... if you wish.
I'm really liking the new assisted modelling capabilities released in 2020.2, but it should not error if the data contains: spatial, blob, date, datetime, or datetime types.
This is essentially telling the user to add an extra step of adding a select before the assisted modelling tool and then a join after the models. I think the tool should be able to read in and through these field types (especially dates) and just not use them in any of the modelling.
An even better enhancement would be to transform date as part of the assisted modelling into something usable for the modelling (season, month, day of week, etc.)
The crosstab tool replaces any non-alphanumeric characters with underscores in column names. It would be helpful to keep the original values as column names (or to have the option to toggle whether or not special characters are replaced with underscores).
This is often an issue for reporting and for dynamically-populated app inputs (e.g. drop-down), where we need to retain the special characters.
For example, say I have the following dataset:
Currently, the crosstab tool produces this:
I would like this:
There are currently (somewhat cumbersome) workarounds such as adding an extra row with the original names, and then using Dynamic Rename to rename the columns, but it would be great to be able to use the data straight out of the crosstab!
Any python user will tell you that one of the reasons why python is so powerful is the ability to access values using their indexes. It would be great if alteryx had such a system in place too, where you can access values or loop over them using their index, which can then be applied in creating new columns or calculations.
P.S - I know we can use the python tool but I would rather see this ability built in the formula tool.
In the Union Field, we have the option to manually configure fields. This is currently done horizontally, which makes it difficult to see every field (if dealing with lots of columns), if we could have a tick-box, and switch this to vertical, then we could use a view similar to the select field.
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.
This has probably been mentioned before, but in case it hasn't....
The dynamic input tool is useful for bringing in multiple files / tabs, but quickly stops being fit for purpose if schemas / fields differ even slightly. The common solution is to then use a dynamic input tool inside a batch macro and set this macro to 'Auto Configure by Name', so that it waits for all files to be run and then can output knowing what it has received.
It's a pain to create these batch macros for relatively straightforward and regular processes - would it be possible to have this 'Auto Configure by Name' as an option directly in the dynamic input tool, relieving the need for a batch macro?
There are currently 7 data types related to numeric values, including byte. Simply and standardize the way Alteryx handles numeric values. Condense the numeric data types to one and provide a way to control the decimal places by indicating how many are needed to the right of the decimal. The current numeric datatypes are confusing and do not behave the same with the formulas functions, like Round.
Adopt the standard numeric functions seen across multiple tools and languages like Excel, SQL, etc; like RoundUp, RoundDown, AbsoluteValue, Integer, etc.
Similar to "Start here" dataflow, it would be useful to specify a path within the User settings to open a dataflow "template" file when the users do not have permission to add or replace "start here" dataflow.
Within our organisation, we are required to have the dataflow summary. We have prepared a dataflow to meet these requirements but currently unable to share it like "start here" template so that every Alteryx session opens the agreed datalow "template" file.
The Remove Null Rows feature added to the Data Cleansing tool is really nice, however it doesn't work for a common use case for us where we have key metadata field(s) added to the data stream that make rows not null so we'd like to be able to ignore or exclude one or more fields from the Remove Null Rows output.
Here's a use case starting with an Excel file with multiple tabs where each tab holds the records for a different Province:
Note that the 2nd record in Southern is entirely empty, so this is the record that we'd like to remove using the Data Cleansing tool.
Since the Province name is only in the worksheet name (and not in the data) I'm using a Dynamic Input tool with the "Output File Name as Field" to include the worksheet name so I can parse it out later. So the output of the Dynamic Input looks like this:
With the FileName field populated the entire row is not Null and therefore the Remove Null Rows feature of the Data Cleansing tool fails to remove that record:
Therefore what we'd like is when we're using the Remove null rows feature in the Data Cleansing tool to be able to choose field(s) to ignore or exclude from that evaluation. For example in the above use case we might tick the "FileName" checkbox to exclude it and then that 2nd row in Southern would be removed from the data.
There are workarounds to use a series of other tools (for example multi-field formula + filter + select) to do this, so extending the Data Cleansing tool to support this feature is a nice to have.
I've attached the sample packaged workflow used to create this example.
Data Cleansing - Remove Null Rows filename issue.yxzp
Assisted modeling is a great idea but right now it's a bit unflexible.
IMHO the greatest strength is the semi-automated transform tool, which would extremely helpful on its own.
What would be great is the possibility of using the features without having to go through the assisted modeling wizard but as single tools with minimal configuration, so that it could be used as an automated system for quickly choosing variables.
This way we could have a pretty much perfect rapid prototyping tool for machine learning tasks, leaving more freedom in modeling and enabling less skilled analysts in easily finding on which variables they should focus.
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.
It would be great to have variations of the Output Data Tool that are file format specific. The current tool looks the same no matter the file format. This can be confusing when your workflow outputs to 2 or more file formats. You can add a label, but they take up space. A visual cue would provide a quick and simple means to identify the format of the output tool. A solution might be an icon for each specific file format, or just different color variations of the current icon that a user could assign.