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
Our corporation has multiple private studios set up (depending on various teams within our infrastructure); when we provide a user access to one private studio, they cannot be part of another private studio (to update/add/remove their workflows); they can view/see them within the collections, but cannot action them.
If possible within the Alteryx Server interface, could users be added to multiple/different private studios (and be authorized for all), and have a toggle that would allow them to switch back and forth? This would alleviate a lot of our issues we have with users reporting/being involved with multiple teams (who are requiring access to different private studios).
Can we add an ability to manually adjust the order of workflows in a collection? I don't think we should have to go and click the column to sort each time if we want them in alphabetical order. It looks better for the end user to have everything nice an arranged when you have multiple processes in each collection.
Links included in the notification emails sent to users (e.g. links to collections/workflows in our Private Gallery) or copied from the browser address bar only works for public workflows or for workflows in your private studio.
If the workflow is in a collection shared with you, clicking on the link takes you to what seems to be the gallery page for the workflow asking you to sign in, but after you sign-in you are redirected to the gallery home page and not back to the workflow page.
The same occurs regardless if you're already signed-in or not.
This was related to support case: 00352021
It's been mentioned previously but I haven't seen an official idea posted. The width of the "Name" column on the Collections page needs to be adjustable to allow users to see the full name. Since we have many distinct areas, we use naming conventions to help organize different groups' Collections. But, even as short as we try to keep it the full names don't appear most of the time. At the very least, increase the default width because cutting the names off after 24 characters is simply too short.
The search for replacing a workflow is poor (and I get that it is probably challenging to write on the back end) but as a result even if I type in the exact title of the workflow (aka copy and paste) Alteryx replace can't find it. Not only does this mean I have multiple workflows with the same name running around (loads of fun with lack of version control) but it also makes this entire thing more frustrating every time I update a workflow (as normally this also means the scheduling of said workflow breaks).
It would be awesome if instead of having to search by title for your workflow that you wish to replace with if you could instead use the URL where Alteryx Gallery put the workflow and then there wouldn't be any confusions about which workflow and you wouldn't have to type.
When looking at a Workflow in the Gallery there is no way to tell if it currently resides in a collection. As a suggestion, a good place to have this information would be in the header block of a workflow where the version information and number of times a workflow was run is stored.
In our private studios and in our home page we see our workflows in grid view by default and can toggle that to list view if we want.
BUT we can only see our collections and the workflows in them in list view.
Please can you add the ability to view our collections in grid view?
Currently the e-mail settings for the server are set up using a wizard and are not available within the admin UI.
Please could you add an explicit section to the Admin UI to allow the admin team to set up approved SMTP settings, allowing this all to be managed in one admin console.
Further: Can you allow the admins to push these settings down to the desktop users. This would allow the admin team to control the SMTP usage and prevent data leakage. It would also reduce complexity for the user since the SMTP settings are all pre-set making eMail tools; and Events easier to set up.
Hi Alteryx,
Now, under the Job Tab, it is only show the status of running job.
Suggest to add one new page for showing the run history of each workflow/job.
1. Workflow name
2. Priority
3. Assigned Worker
4. Start time
5. End time
6. Duration
7. State
8. Job Type (schedule or manual tracker)
9. Owner
10. Message ( e.g. error log)
Best regards,
Samuel
Hi Alteryx,
The scale of the column width in Alteryx Gallery is fixed.
Sometime may not show the whole word of that column, it is very inconvenience.
Actually, not only in gallery but also in designer. Like the Manage Data Connections pop-up window.
Even in 2019.4, the display problem hasn't been improved.
Can Alteryx improve the UI of gallery and designer asap?
Best Regards,
Samuel To
My company uses R Shiny and maybe in the future Python Dash to create multiple analytic apps, dashboards, etc for multiple people to run across our company. One thing that would be nice to to have these R Shiny workflows run off of the Alteryx Server as that would allow us to use Alteryx Server to keep permissions and ease of use.
I propose an update to the Alteryx Server that would allow for R Shiny apps to be run in the Alteryx Server with all functionality of custom R interactive plots, etc etc just like what you'd see in one hosted on a R Shiny Server.
The benefits of this would allow for my company to only have to manage one server instance (Alteryx) to run all of this. Since R/Python is allowed/used in Alteryx workflows already, can you add the ability to visualize R Shiny code/plots/interactions/etc within Alteryx Server itself?
It would be great if each user could persist their gallery UI sorting/view changes and leave them as default. When I log in I nearly always immediately switch to list view and sort by most recent modified. This means everytime I access a set of workflows there are at least 3 click actions before I can even start working.
When building a complicated or resource heavy workflow, it would really useful to be able to have menu option upon right-clicking a tool output to add all the downstream steps to a container. With that one option, a user could then
I would like to have the ability to configure my company's Gallery to display more than five applications/workflows to a page. This is a waste of screen space and creates unnecessary clicks for browsing.
Hey there,
Below you can see few of my suggestion to improve Alteryx Server.
Idea for Alteryx Server monitoring:
Give server more functionality with:
Hopefully you will find these suggestions interesting and useful.
Regards,
Aurimas
The admin (aka curator) needs to be given more control. The admin should have greater control than the users of the system.
My organization is in the Healthcare industry and we have HIPAA laws to abide by when it comes to data. Not all users should be able to see all data. Developers should not have complete control over the data they publish.
Private studio
Collections
Get tips from Tableau as they have admin controls down with their permissions process.
Gallery Devs -
When I click 'Add Tags' to an application in Gallery, the tag listing comes up chronologically by time time created, as opposed to alphabetically. It looks ridiculous to see this:
Underwear
Shoes
Dresses
Bandannas
Socks
Jewelry
This is the easiest fix ever.
When user execute workflow from library, it is better to show workflow with execution status at each step.
It will help for business to identify the failed tool instead of validating entire workflow.
We have installed Server on Azure VM and have looked into options such as a replica AD Domain Controller in the Azure environment for authentication, however, we would like to have Server authenticated using Azure AD.
User | Likes Count |
---|---|
15 | |
9 | |
7 | |
7 | |
5 |