Alteryx Server Ideas

Hello all,

As of today, if you want to give the Alteryx Gallery user an Excel with your data out of your worfklow, you MUST design an Excel Report with Report tools.

However :
1/ It's highly time consuming to design the report
2/ It leads to many errors, especially on column size : a quick research on Alteryx community gives you several hundred topics
3/ the excel output works really fine

This is frustrating as hell for users !

Best regards,

Simon

When a workflow is run manually in the gallery the user is able to enter input parameters. However when using the schedule functionality this option is not available and a separate workflow needs to be developed to dynamically derive input parameters. Effectively two separate versions of the workflow need to be created and maintained.

If this functionality could be built into a future version of Alteryx this would be of significant benefit.

In the interest of information and system security, would it be possible to provide a means to remove social media and email sharing options (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) from the SHARING drop down menus, such as through a configurable setting in the RuntimeSettings.xml file?

Currently there is no means (confirmed by Alteryx tech support) to remove these options from the sharing menu.  Sharing within the system can be controlled somewhat by controlling access to the system or specific output locations.Once the info leaves the system, there is no longer any means of control.

Providing a configurable option will allow locations to tailor to their specific needs.

For professional alteryx admins - it is important to know if a particular asset has been updated (so that we can bring the updated version into our env), with some idea of release notes so that we can understand if the update breaks backward compatibiity and what has been changed.

Additionally - it would be very helpful for admins to be able to be notified of new assets created by particular authors whom I trust.

On Success --> Do This

On Fail --> Do that

The lack of control and flexibility around the scheduler seems to cause people to bury the logid down in runner macros or unnessarily poll custom log tables to see if a status has changed.

I am aware of a couple of clients calling for this functionality. This can be performed via command line but it realy needs to be in the scheduler options.

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

Enhance the v3 APi for workflows - /v3/workflows/{workflowid} - to get information for first n versions and/or last n versions of the workflow.

The problem

The current API will return information about all versions of a workflow. If a workflow has several hundred versions, you'll get all version information, much of which is useless and can take a long time to process.

The (potential) solution

Allow the API to take parameters like first n versions and last n versions. This will allow the API to return only the respective version information that would be of interest to the user.

The red box in the image is the enhancement in swagger:

Hello Alteryx team, 

I would like to propose idea that was mentioned on the community but there is no solution either.

It was mentioned at https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Alteryx-Designer-Discussions/Data-Cleansing-tool-suddenly-stopped-w...

The issue is related to Qlik Analytics Samples and error that it is causing with wrong path error for default macros like eg.CountRecords.

Hi all,

I've found, i guess, a bug on the Gallery. It's not really an issue as we've found a workaround for it. 

Whenever you're in need to delete a workflow that is owned by your co-worker, the Gallery doesn't let you instantly delete it (yes, we're in the same private studio) (screenshot 1).

To work around this issue, you just have to replace the specific workflow by a random workflow you own (basically i just upload a workflow with a browse tool in it, screenshot 2). 

When replaced, you get the god power to delete the workflow and thus also deleting the workflow of your co-worker. 

It would be convenient if i could just delete the workflow without this workaround tough :-)!.

Screenshot 1 - Not being able to delete a workflow owned by a co-worker.

Screenshot 2 - After replacing the workflow by a random workflow....

Greetings,

Seb

Hi all, Per this thread, it would be helpful if we could have finer control of scheduled jobs in Alteryx Server: https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Publishing-Gallery/Resource-control-on-scheduled-jobs/m-p/61016/hig...

Specifically:

- Dependancies (one job should run after another in a chain)

- lower priority (some jobs should go down the priority queue to allow for others so that high priority jobs are not blocked by other less important ones)

Thank you Sean

We have a lot of Alteryx users that generate their workflows in Private Studios and set them up as scheduled Workflows, but the assigned Workers/job tags in Private Studio aren't carrying over to the scheduled workflow, which has to be updated by someone with higher access.  This is creating a time consuming task for our administrator who have to update these scheduled workflows to make sure our unassigned Worker node isn't overloaded.

I am in the process of migrating apps from the old gallery to the new. I have screen captures of the results from the same app in both. In the older gallery version, if there is only a single file type available, it defaults to that file type and you click the icon for the type. In the new gallery version, you must select a file type before you can download the file, even if there is only a single type available. The dropdown makes sense for one that you have multiple types (like pcxml), but it makes no sense to require the user to go through an extra step to select a type before downloading when that's the only type they can download. Please see all the screen captures. The blue-ish background is from the new gallery.

We really like the idea of the Server Usage Report.  But the PDF is somewhat limited and we use Power BI instead of Tableau.  It would be great if the Workflow had an option for outputting to Power BI.

Hi

It will be great to make visibility of workflow execution results to other users in same subscription.

As of now, only schedules are visible to all users in a subscription, but not the workflow execution results executed by a user to other users in same subscription. 

This will avoid duplicate execution of same workflow by multiple user in a team as it will provide option to cross check the execution results by other users, if executed already, before execution of same workflow.

Regards

Haribabu Muppaneni

Hello Community:

I was looking in the notifications part of the Gallery Admin and saw a glaring ommission: The validation email was something about a code, but nothing about a workflow. "What?!" I interrogo-banged.Where is "Email when workflow is complete?"

I would like to move that Gallery include an option (at the workflow level and globally within a studio (perhaps beyond, I'm a newb to Gallery)) that a user can subscribe to an email notification if the workflow completes (or errors out). 

Where I'm currently working, we have some workflows that take, literally, in the twenty-plus hour range. Instead of having to check when it is complete, it would be really nice to get an email from Gallery saying: "Hi guys! [Workflow X] is done! YAY!"

I realise there's an email tool in the rendering, but that is... shall we say, complicated. In this case, we're using an R-tool, so all the downstream tools are blind to the metadata. Filtering records down to one so that only one email is sent at the end of the chain is... challenging (remember that 20-hour thing? Try developing on a 20+ hour cycle. It's like 1970 up in here!). And totally counterintuitive. I also feel new users will have issues configuring an email tool; it took me 3 months to get ours to work and it only works from our server. Plus, it's a kludgy workaround. 

I feel that this would probably be easy to implement and fits the sensibilities of Gallery. 

Vote this up, folks!

Cheers,

Cedric

Our Organization uses a Password Manager to automate the update of service account credentials used in Windows Services. 

Would like to request the ability to leverage that functionality with the Run As user inside of Alteryx Server Settings used with Workflows. 

This would increase application security, while ensuring the process is automated, thereby limiting issues from human interaction.

Examples of these types of application are ERPM(Enterprise Random Password Manager), Thycotic Secret Server, and I am sure there are others. 

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).

In the Alteryx Gallery UI, it's possible to set up workflow credentials so that a workflow published to the gallery runs as a specific user.  

Unfortunately when that workflow is run from the Alteryx Gallery API, it appears to only ever run as the Alteryx Server Run-As account. 

Our developers in working with this figured out that if they called the (undocumented) API that runs the actual Alteryx Gallery directly, they can achieve what they want, but it seems a risky strategy.

The idea would be:

-Either unify the APIs so that the Gallery itself uses the same API to run workflows as what you present as the "Gallery API" (the eat your own dogfood way)

-Alter the Gallery API to enable us to run as a different workflow credential

Without this, we're forced to permission the run-as account to access anything that uses this method, which in turn then becomes a bit of a security hole (any workflow run will have access to everything that the run-as account uses) 

Hi,

@patrick_digan pointed out to me today that in my ignorance I thought that the "On Success - Show Results to User" option in Interface Designer did something on Alteryx Gallery, like it does when run locally.  I tried to prove him wrong (I've been manually checking off what outputs I want since day 1! How could it not have been doing anything?!) and failed miserably.  As far as we can tell, this functionality is simply non-existent within Gallery.

Please add this functionality so that we can suppress files (without reverting to hacky tricks like changing the output location so the Gallery can't see the output) with a simple check box.

Link to my shame, where I very openly explained exactly how I thought I had been solving this problem the whole time, and how after testing and review, it looks like I hadn't done anything with this configuration.

All these check boxes... and they don't change anything!