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.
The select tool does a great job at flagging up when something has changed from its original state. However why does this not happen with the checkboxes to keep or remove a field? It would be much faster and easier to read if we could have the same color conditional formatting as the rest.
Often as I am scraping web sites, some clever developer has put an invisible character (ASCII or Unicode) in the data which causes terrible trouble.
I've identified 89 instances of zero-width or non-zero-width glyphs that are not visible and/or Alteryx does not classify as whitespace. There are probably more, but Unicode is big y'all.
Unfortunately, the Trim() string function only removes 4 of these characters (Tab, Newline, Carriage Feed, and Space). REGEX_REPLACE with the \s option (which is what the Cleanse macro uses) is a little better but still only removes 20. And it removes all instances, not just leading and trailing.
I'll create a container and then customize the colours, margins, transparency, border and then want consistency for other containers. It would be nice to have a format painter function (brush) to apply the format of one container to another. This of course could be extended to other tools like comments. There might be a desire to apply this to more tools too, but the comments and containers would be my focus as they are almost always custom configured.
It is just a bit of annoyance, really. I'd like to see the option of inputting a hexcode of color and/or a screen color picker in the color dialog. At the moment, you have to change R, G, B separately or play around with the cursor to find the right color.
The color dialog is relevant for the documentation purposes but also reporting tools and I'm sure it would make life easier to some people, especially when branding colours are important.
It would be extremely useful to quickly find which of my many workflows feed other workflows or reports.
A quick and easy way to do this would be to export the dependencies of a list of workflows in a spreadsheet format. That way users could create their own mapping by linking outputs of one workflow, to inputs of another.
Looking at the simple example below, the Customers workflow would feed the Market workflow.
SQL Table 1
SQL Table 2
Excel File 1
Excel File 2
Excel File 3
Excel File 3
SQL Table 3
It would be CRAZY AWESOME if we could get a report like this for all scheduled workflows in the scheduler.
At the moment containers either expand and overlap other tools, or you have to leave space for them (defeating the original purpose of using them). Is there a way we can have the containers expansion shift the workflow so the others tools shift down / right to account for this expanision?
We are using Alteryx designer to bulk upload to Snowflake database. We also use Alteryx Connect to pick up metadata from Snowflake. It would be awesome if the designer can add table and field description and snowflake loader can pick up the description automatically.
As of now, the metadata loader doesnt pick up metadata content in real time. This feature will motivate our analysts to document which will improve Connect adoption in our department.
When searching for Alteryx help on Google the search results rarely return the current version of the Help documentation from the Alteryx website. Instead, what often happens is that an old version of the Help documentation is returned.
For example, a search for 'Run Commend Tool Alteryx' returns links for the 2018.3 and 11.3 instances of the help page:
These relate to prior versions of Alteryx and a better result would be to link to the /current/ version of the page (the URL for which never changes).
The problem above can be replicated for almost any tool or variant of search terms.
Since Google is such a crucial resource for troubleshooting, there is a risk that (a) users will inadvertently access out of date documentation and (b) users will be confused by the presence of multiple search results.
By adding a 'robots.txt' file to web pages for prior versions of the tool these results can be suppressed from Google search results.
It would be useful to have the WorkflowName captured as one of the default Engine constants. The WorkflowDirectory is included so why not the WorkflowName as well?
I often have to use configuration files to pass in values to workflows meaning the workflow name needs to be manually entered into the workflow, either as a text input or User Constant, which feels like an unnecessary step as Alteryx must know the name of the workflow once it has been saved.
Not sure if this is a Designer or Connect idea but the idea is to allow more options when searching in Connect from the Designer interface. As of now, it seems that it is only possible to search for tables and views, or generally those objects which can be added as an input data tool.
I believe that search directly from Designer is a great feature and at least our clients use it more and more. Would it be also possible to find workflows within Connect catalogue and open these workflows in Designer?
This could also apply to other data assets within the Data sources section like APIs, procedures etc.
To get simple information from a workflow, such as the name, run start date/time and run end date/time is far more complex than it should be. Ideally the log, in separate line items distinctly labelled, would have the workflow path & name, the start date/time, and end date/time and potentially the run time to save having to do a calculation. Also having an overall module status would be of use, i.e. if there was an Error in the run the overall status is Error, if there was a warning the overall status is Warning otherwise Success.
Parsing out the workflow name and start date/time is challenge enough, but then trying to parse out the run time, convert that to a time and add it to the start date/time to get the end date/time makes retrieving basic monitoring information far more complex than it should be.
As stated in the help on the Alteryx website, hive as a data source in Alteryx is validated for Hive 2.0. We were wondering if the most recent version of hive is included in the roadmap and, should anybody migrate to HIVE 3.0, what kind of support can be expected in case of technical issues ?
When a custom (bespoke for @chrislove) macro is created, I would like the option to create an annotation that goes along with the tool. This is entirely cosmetic, but might help users to recognize the macro.