Alteryx Server Ideas

Ability to change the default workflow settings when to also include [Others may view this workflow's history] in a similar way to the other attributes in workflow settings that are set by default.  This would prove beneficial for workflows which are shared across a large team and need to be run on a consistent frequency and are not run headless.  The inability to set this by default leaves a risk that the setting remains unchecked and more than one user triggers that workflow in a given month which could result in a material impact if the output of that workflow is posting to another system in the firm.

Hello, 

We have been building a solution for a client that involved chaining apps. When we uploaded the workflow to the server, we got the below error: Workflow exceeded maximum runtime of 30 seconds and was cancelled. We were able to rectify this by having the client implement the change here. While I understand the need for the limit, is there any plan to have this fix be more obvious to the average user to implement or avoid needing to reimplement following a server upgrade?

Thanks, 

I Would Like a new Email added under [ Admin -> Notifications -> Emails ] where it would send an Email when a Schedule reaches the status "Complete" 

This can serve a couple of use cases;

1. You have many things going on and this email can let you know "This schedule has now been completed"  
   1. From my experience we usually schedule things indefinitely, however if an end was put in place this can be a reminder of whether or not to continue scheduling the workflow
2. It can also notify when a schedule inadvertently reaches "Complete" status, in the backend this could be because it has status "Corrupt: AlteryxService_RetrieveSecureData Failed."
   1. This has caused issues multiple times of schedules that are supposed to be indefinite reach "Complete" Status without our knowing. With many workflows and schedules this is not something we can babysit.
   2. brief research suggests this error could be due to restarting the Alteryx Service during a schedule, which we do weekly for our backup. And trying to coordinate a time when no schedules are running is difficult when something runs every 10 minutes.

When using In-DB with iSeries over Generic ODBC everything works fine in Designer however when executing via Gallery process fails because a semi-colon ";" is added to the SQL statement as a terminator character and iSeries rejects this SQL0104 - Token ; was not valid. Valid Values < END OF STATEMENT > 

We have a MongoDB connection string that we plug in to RuntimeSettings.xml during install.  Upon startup, the Mongo connection fails because RuntimeSettings.xml expects the connecting string to be encrypted.  The fix for this, is for someone to manually update the MongoDB connection via the Alteryx UI.  We would like a way to encrypt the MongoDB connection string for RuntimeSettings.xml before we start Alteryx for the first time.

Hi Alteryx Team,

I understand that the Timeout feature on all Workers is only available for the workflows scheduled on Alteryx Server.

In a heavily used server environment and depending on how workflows are configured, can we have a timeout feature available for non-scheduled workflows (adhoc workflow runs/manually triggered workflow runs) as well on all the Workers on Alteryx Server ?

Thank You,

Nishi Jain

Have the Alteryx Server send a notification when the license is within a configurable amount of days to being expired via SMTP

Hello all,

Right now, we can choose either MongoDb or Microsoft SQL Server as a backend. I would suggest to add Postgresql. Why ?

-it's open-source
-it's reliable
-it's free
-it works well on many environments
-it's popular
-it's already used as backend for Tableau or Qlik and many others
-it respects SQL norm and doesn't have a lot of specificity

Best regards,

Simon

Hi all,

Currently, it is very challenging, nearly impossible, to distribute your workload between worker nodes as the image below. Curators should be able to manage this in multiple ways since the end-user doesn`t have a full understanding of the server architecture or strategy behind the idea.

It would be helpful to have the worker tags working similarly to the credentials pyramid where we can have levels of permissions. That way, we can have collections, user groups or even single users with worker tags configured.

This is an addition to the idea suggested by @ivane_meimban 

https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Server-Ideas/Enable-Curators-to-assign-default-worker-tag-a...

Thank you,

Fernando Vizcaino

Upon utilizing the Alteryx gallery to create and test an automation app in cooperation with other business areas, we found that the list of "recent modified files" that appears when selecting a file browse query has several issues, or areas in desperate need of improvement:

Not only does this list append new files to the bottom, resulting in a less than desirable experience when selecting files from this list across multiple occasions when testing, but the list eventually reaches a capacity where no new files can be shown. Furthermore, for processes that involve small modifications being made to a file or group of files that is fairly consistent in naming, a list of ambiguously named files will quickly cause confusion. If this type of small improvement is possible, please reach out to me about any avenues towards achieving it, or if there is a person or department to appropriately contact.

-John

We have groups asking within our organization for ways to check the status of a running workflow in Gallery. They are wanting to understand which step in the process the workflow has completed for longer-running workflows.

They are looking for an experience similar to when running in Designer where they can see which tools have been completed. At the very least, they would like the log to be reported live and not shown at the end of the run.

Currently, the run feels like a black box where they do not know how close it is to completion or which steps it has made it through.

We have tried to build workarounds like the Email tool, but have been unsuccessful. For example, the Email tool does not send an Email until the workflow completes which defeats the purpose. The closest workaround is writing our own log along the way that can be reported on which is not a clean solution. 

HI All, 

In the Gallery Page under My Workspace-->Share With Me we could see the fields like Name, Type, Owner, Shared Source, Uploaded, Manual Runs. Among these we are not able to sort the fields "Type" and "Owner" alphabetically, whereas we are able to sort the other fields Name, Shared Source, Uploaded, Manual Runs accordingly. Kindly refer the attached snapshot. 

Regards, 

Ariharan R

On far too many occasions I have been working on a workflow in designer with either the outputs disabled via the configuration or using containers (preventing file creation/updating during testing) and I would save them back up to server without remembering to re-enable these outputs, which causes lots of issues down the line when users are trying to access these processes.

A simple warning on loading to the gallery that there are disabled tools and what tool id they are would mitigate this issue.

Sometimes a schedule is enabled that we want to disable. We edit the schedule, click the button to disable the schedule, click "Save". Then refresh the page and it's enabled still. The schedule will not disable in some cases. In the cases where it does get disabled, clicking the "Save" button appears to have no action. There's no confirmation and the screen stays static. Two suggestions:

• Have some UI response confirming that the changes have been saved.
• Provide an error message with explanation when the changes can't be saved (or just fix the bug)

We are getting an error saving flow to our private gallery with US Geocoder tool.

The error speak to "public" and not "private" gallery and we get the reasoning except that we should be able to save to our private gallery and deploys solutions internally that we built using these tools and data.

We are on 2020.4.6 on both the gallery and laptop.

Laptop is in Business Insights trial.

Servers all have Insights add-on

I found in the community a post where you can manually update the flow run settings but the user mistook that the flow did save even with error.

This allows the job to work but it is annoying that

• Each flow they build they would have to accept that it is ok on saving with error
• I am concerned they may miss a real error buried in the messaging
• Please change the font color and message to a “Warning” in gold font like the “Results View” vs an “Error” in red font because it is not really an error and any real errors would then stand out
• Then they have to take extra step in the Gallery to enable the flow to work…

I recommend modifying the User “Actions” options to include an “Allow Insights” option.

This can then be used in

1. determining if to even generate messaging on these jobs at save time.
   1. user has authorization and this is to private gallery and not public gallery
2. avoids having to make someone made a curator when they SHOULD NOT have curator/server wide powers.
3. Preset the workflow setting based on the saving developers user setting thus eliminating the extra step of setting the workflow setting in the Gallery post save.

Doing this simplifies and automates the process and significantly improves user experience when developing insights flows for use in the gallery.

A user/curator/artisan can schedule a workflow to run even if they do NOT have access to 1 of the database connections within the workflow.  The Alteryx Gallery still allows the user to schedule it to run.However, the workflow will never run because the user does not have access to 1 of the database connections within the workflow. Ideally, the scheduler should validate that the user has access to all 

needed connections within the scheduled workflow.

I have inherited admin duties, and have been running to many problems. Some of which will escalate when the subscriptions go away. 

The pages desperately need to be updated for a more streamlined admin experience.

Couple examples I came up with below. 

Naming Convention

• Allow workflow renaming without the replace function.
• Force a unique plan name across all private studios. instead of being unique on just ID.

API Access

• Allow any user who can access the module from Collections to be able to trigger it from the API using their own API key.
• Store results of "API" triggered workflows on the page.
• Groups:

• Identify Users without a group
• Identify users in more than one group
• Add multiple users at one time (Muticheck box) with filters.

User Page

• Add/remove Users to Groups
• View, add, and remove Collections from Their User Page

Collection Page

• Add Collection from the Admin collection Page

Designer "save" window.

• Give the ability on Save As & Save for the user to automatically share the plan with their collection(s).
• Default all "Workflow" assets to be unchecked by default, rather than relying on users to click "workflow options"," manage workflow assets", and then uncheck everything.

Workflow Page

• Change Owner (Can be limited to admin only)
• Add directly to collection from this page.
• Do not reset the "private data exemption" to default every time an updated version is updated.
• Allow admin users to see logs of all users who run the plan (Also add this to the admin page while you are at it)

When it comes to cancelling a running/queued job though the Gallery admin portal it never fails to add some new jobs to the list right as I am about to click to cancel a job,

thus instead of removing the unnecessary queued job I actually cancel the job that has been running for the past hour creating the report I need for the meeting in 30 minutes 

I think that adding check boxes (similar to the "Users" page) would be a nice UI enhancement to this page  

Would like to see more flexible options for workflow run-as credential settings, both for when publishing the workflow and kicking off the job. 

Here is a thread where we discuss the limitations we are seeing when trying to publish the workflow to Gallery via an API. We would also like to see more flexibility when our users want to kick off their workflows via an API where they could pass in different run-as credentials they would like the job to run as.