Be sure to review our Idea Submission Guidelines for more information!
Submission GuidelinesHello all,
This may be a little controversial. As of today, when you buy an Alteryx Server, the basic package covers up to 4 cores :
https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Server-Knowledge-Base/How-Alteryx-defines-cores-for-licensing-our-products/ta-p/158030
I have always known that. But these last years, the technology, the world has evolved. Especially the number of cores in a server. As an example, AMD Epyc CPU for server begin at 8 cores :
https://www.amd.com/en/processors/epyc-7002-series
So the idea is to update the number of cores in initial package for 8 or even 16 cores. It would :
-make Alteryx more competitive
-cost only very few money
-end some user frustration
Moreover, Alteryx Server Additional Capacity license should be 4 cores.
Best regards,
Simon
Hello,
We would like to have the option to configure the timeout of the manual running jobs, as already exists for the schedule jobs.
Regards
Today, when you share a workflow with someone else through the collection, you cannot see the manual run that the person will do, neither the person will see yours.
This is really annoying as this is not helping collaboration between colleagues.
Since we use an external scheduler and the server api, only the job owner will see the job execution results within the gallery.
Idea here would be to let the sharing of job execution result as an option in the collection.
Idea: Option to receive an email notification when a schedule gets disabled (could be added in the user settings, see attached picture)
Business Impact: The implementation of this idea would reduce delays that might even have a financial impact because
not receiving any notifications when a schedule was disabled could lead to
I would be glad if you could implement this idea because I think it would be useful for a lot of people!
Hello all,
According to wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webhook
"A webhook in web development is a method of augmenting or altering the behavior of a web page or web application with custom callbacks. These callbacks may be maintained, modified, and managed by third-party users and developers who may not necessarily be affiliated with the originating website or application. "
An example : whoever publishes an asset, I receive a notification on Teams and when a scheduling task fails, it creates automatically an analysis task on Trello.
Seems cool, huh?
Guys at Tableau have implemented it (https://help.tableau.com/current/developer/webhooks/en-us/ ) and so do the guys for Qlik Cloud.
Best regards,
Simon
Hello all,
Nowadays, chatting, commenting, having a discussion on assets that are published on a server is a very common feature, and a useful one !
Here an example on Tableau :
Collaboration is not a luxury item !
Best regards,
Simon
This idea has been touted in different flavours over the years (but not implemented), but I'd like to push it a little further:
1. Create the ability to collaboratively edit an Alteryx workflow - e.g. like you can edit Microsoft documents collaboratively. If the front-end is primarily an XML interface, this should in theory be possible?
2. Version control (not version tracking) - i.e. automatically state the differences in scripts between versions and allow for checking in and checking out of code
3. Power BI & Tableau Prep have the ability to see exactly what changes were made and to reverse steps to get back to a specific stage of development: it would be great to have a panel that tracks all the edits you've made since you started editing the workflow
In simple terms, a modern, interactive way for multiple developers to work together, but also to encourage the use of Server to "check in" your application and to avoid developers saving the same file over & over again locally.
I'd like to request the ability for the Curators to change the priority on Apps in the Gallery.
Today we have a system where users are not allowed to set the priority on workflows. The Curators change the priority of scheduled workflows based on workflow runtime/ business need by going to Gallery Admin> Jobs> Scheduled Workflows, and then editing the schedule priority.
The problem that that we have a numbers of Gallery Members/ Viewers that run Apps through the day that are very fast to run, but depending on how big is the queue they can several minutes/ hour until a spot is free to run.
If would be very helpful to get a better UX if the curator can choose which apps should have a higher priority to run.
Thanks,
Mauricio Estevez
currently, there isn't any way to fully delete (safely) a user from the gallery. So if there is a previous client or previous employee in gallery, we cannot clean up the gallery settings - only "disable". It would be great to have a "trash can" symbol next to the users where we can remove them from the server and keep all of the users clean.
We want to share direct links to analytics apps with our users. However this does not work with our current SAML login. This the use case.
1. User clicks on direct link URL for the app
2. User is required to click log-in button
3. After login user is taking to the gallery home page not to the app
The end effect is that we cannot share links to apps with our casual users, instead we have to instruct them to go to the gallery log in and then search all public workflows for the specific app they are looking for. Not a great user experience, especially because we did not have this issue before single sign on support.
personally I think this is bug more than a feature request, but was asked to create it as a request by support
When scheduling an analytical app on Gallery, there is no UI for submitting app values. This significantly limits the value of scheduling workflows and using analytical apps. With this feature, it would allow our users to have more flexible scheduling while also simply maintaining one workflow. Because this feature doesn't exist, we have had to build workarounds by either creating multiple workflows or utilizing APIs.
Since this feature is already available for manual runs and APIS (shown below), it shouldn't be a reach to also have this feature when scheduling a run.
Manual Method:
API Method: GET /workflows/{appId}/questions
Scheduling Method (no app questions):
Given the security requirements of our company collections need to be created centrally, which is fine for sub-organizations that only require one collection. However, the large sub-orgs require more than 1 collection, ideally we would create the top-level collection and give the sub-org the access to create their own sub-collection within that collection, but not the ability to create collections at the top-level.
When you add a workflow you have to add its schedule to share the results in collection menber's.
A workflow can be in several collections and therefore different users can schedule it. (why not)
This results in multiple schedules for the same workflow. There is no reason why a workflow cannot have multiple schedules.(mandatory in some cases)
Automatically adding schedules to the collection would allow users to see that there is already a schedule on the workflows in question and not to recreate one!
it should also be possible to create a schedule from the collection.
One of our Server customers has a need to disable all schedules temporarily across all worker nodes. I do not see an easy way to do this unless we go into each worker's settings and disable from there, but this is not ideal.
The reason is for scheduled maintenance windows during a large upgrade or migration. Currently stopping the Alteryx Service on each worker is time consuming.
Thank you!
Hello all,
Alteryx Designer Cloud is quite young, somehow incomplete, not compatible with Alteryx Desktop etc... but I'm very optimistic than in a few years it will become a killing app !
That said, I'm more skeptical on this race to the cloud : from my experience, Cloud should just be one way of selling a product, not the only one. It has a lot of cons and a lot of pros and customers should have the possibility to choose between "on-premise" and "cloud" product, and change from one to the other very easily.
My main customer on Alteryx is a government agency that deals with highly confidential, personal data. They won't go to cloud. Not in the next ten years. But they would love to have the Alteryx Designer Cloud on their own server.
Best regards,
Simon
It would be a very pleasing user experience if we could enjoy the Server usage with a true dark mode. The customization in the Theme-Panel isn't advanced enough to do it ourselves - unless we deep dive into the css-files. The CSS already has a good structure and the dark mode could be enable with just a few changes.
Here is a comparison of my server in light and dark mode.
It's probably noticeable that I haven't studied Design, but it should give a rough suggestion how it could look.
Obviously not everyone wants a dark mode, therefore every user should have toggle in the user settings to switch between light and dark mode.
Current State:
Currently, all workflows and applications are in list-form within "My Workspace" (formerly Private Studio) and Collections. In My Workspace, I might have workflows and applications that support a broad range of domain spaces and audiences. As the developer (or Artisan), they're all in My Workspace, but shown as an exhaustive list with no categorization unless I name them to represent not only the function of the workflow/application but also the domain.
Once those same workflows/applications are moved to collections, there can exist confusion over whether the workflow/application is intended for a schedule, manual run, or application. Separating by naming convention gets messy and degrades clarity for non-developer roles.
Proposed Solution:
I would like to see folders, only one or two levels deep, be added to My Workspace and to Collections. This proposed solution would not alter permissions, as those would be common for the parent collection and any assigned roles would function the same for that entire collection. The solution is simply adding organization to enhance the user experience.
For example: I might have a Collection that is intended for my Finance team....
Finance_Collection / Scheduled_ETL_Workflows / Workflows
Finance_Collection / Scheduled_Analytic_Workflows / Workflows
Finance_Collection / Applications_for_AccountingDepartment_ReceivablesTeam / Workflows
Finance_Collection / Applications_for_AccountingDepartment_PayablesTeam / Workflows
Finance_Collection / Manual_ETL_Workflows / Workflows
Finance_Collection / Manual_Analytic_Workflows / Workflows
Finance_Collection / etc...
All persons who have been assigned the role connected to the "Finance Collection" will still see everything in all of the folders but would have a better sense of what "workflows/applications" are intended for their use according to the folders the workflows/applications are organized into.
Value Added (Why This Matters):
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I welcome input and feedback from the community and would appreciate your support if you find this suggestion useful for your Alteryx experience!
In an enterprise multi-node Alteryx Server deployment that has existed for many years and many upgrades, there are artifacts within the MongoDB that are unknown to Gallery Administrators. I envision a workflow or app that is developed by Alteryx that queries the MongoDB and looks for orphaned documents in the MongoDB across all collections. With 2022.3 there is a pre-upgrade check, however, it does not find all unexpected items within the MongoDB. Regular ongoing MongoDB health helps with overall management of the environment and could prompt for support cases before it becomes a problem during pre-upgrade activities.
Hello
Imagine the dream : Alteryx Designer Cloud with in database tools.
Well, that would be so great I won't write more....
Best regards,
Simon
Today, when you trigger a job using the Server API, it is considered as a manual run type. In fact there are only 2 type of jobs : "Scheduled" and "Alteryx_Run"
I think "Alteryx_Run" should be segregated into "API_Run" and "Manual_Run". This way in future version we could treat those type of job differently.
We could also have more stats around the type of jobs.
User | Likes Count |
---|---|
1 | |
1 | |
1 | |
1 | |
1 |