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.
We work in an environment where there needs to be strict partitioning between both workflow and data assets for regulatory reasons (they call this the Chinese Wall).
So - we'd like to have the capability to segment gallery assets in a way that we have one user-base; one set of licenses; one set of administrators; one server - but the ability to segment assets and permissions into domains.
- People who work in Private Wealth should not be able to see flows or assets which belong to the broker-dealer since this would be a risk for insider-trading
- People who work in the merchant bank should not be able to see what's going on in the broker dealer or the Private Wealth business.
However, we do want to be able to administer this as one so that we can see server failures, error logs, etc.
Finally - there will be a very small subset of assets (e.g. shared macros) that can be shared across these domains, but they have to be tightly controlled).
So, I'm poking around the Atlerxy Gallery API stuff with an eye toward building a set of classes that can interact with workflows without exposing Gallery proper to the community at large. That being said, I was a little dismayed to find that all interactions require inclusion of *user specific* API Keys and Secrets. It can be dealt with, but ultimately it means that configuring a middleware tier between the real world and Alteryx server requires an additional hierarchical level; i.e., understanding which of the developers came up with workflow X and having *their* API Key / Secret attached at configuration time.
Anyways, it might be easier to just have a global trusted key / (super) secret. If you get that, you can execute a workflow.
Maybe we have a special studio that people could clone to, and in this way, you'd only have to track a single key/secret outside.
I mean, the existing system works OK for one offs, but if you wanted to have a (semi) modular system in place, dependence on understanding publishing entity specifics seems to muck things up for no discernible benefit. Of course, maybe in some places there is benefit to this scheme (?), but it is causing me to craft some weird work arounds early in development, which gives me a sinking feeling.
What is the Purpose of Server when there is no Sharing?
Alteryx Server/ Gallery Lacks a Basic functionality, All Studio Users should be able to see Workflows published to that Studio.
The Legacy tool has atleast controller key where everyone can see all workflows on the server , but in new versions, we can only see if we are the owner of that workflow? how does this make sense in an Enterprise?
Enable to see server scheduled workflows by all studio users in a studio.
Please fix the reporting of Gallery workflow results as there is a bug. We have about 100 workflows scheduled to execute at 7am daily. All the workflows results say they complete by 07:00:22. Some say they take 5 seconds to run some say they take upwards of 30 seconds to run. Our concurrency is set to 2 workflows, so I can only conclude that this is completely wrong. This needs to be fixed ASAP as I cannot trust these results and I need to build a dependent job.
When scheduling in Gallery and creating a recurring daily schedule, if you a start time of 7AM @ any time after 7am you also have to click the date on a day, for the schedule start date, else the you will receive an error message. Please click the date on automatically, after all if the time is after 7am you can't schedule a job to run at 7am today.
When viewing the schedule viewer with more than the default per page workflow amount of 25 workflows, if you sort it only sorts in the 25 in the current page. I would expect it to first sort all workflows then show the first 25, and actually used the interface with this as my expectation for longer than i'd care to admit, leading to a large amount of confusion when i for some reason couldn't figure out why workflows that i scheduled were not showing up. Obviously this is down to user error and now that i understand it i don't have any issue, but at the same time, why would the sort not apply before population of the list?
Interested to know if i'm the only one who's been annoyed by this.
I'm really loving the new data connections for 11.0. We have deployed them in a private gallery for our users and it's great. The only drawback is that the server itself cannot easily be configured to use these same credentials. I would like some way for the service account running our jobs on our server to use the data connections from the gallery. I can assign the credentials to that service account just fine, but it never picks them up since it never open up the Alteryx GUI when it's running jobs. This would allow us to have one spot with all of the credentials. Currently, we're going to have 2 locations with all of our credentials that we'll have to make sure stays in sync: 1 in the gallery for the users, and 1 on the sever box for the server.
In the View Schedules screen, currently one must select the Controller at the beginning of each session before being able to see any workflows, schedules, queue or results. This is especially annoying when a company only has one controller and yet must select it each time. However, I would guess that even when an organization has multiple Controllers, each individual user is likely to spend most of their time in one.
It would help both of these situations if the most recently used controller is automatically selected when launching Alteryx Designer.
It would be cool if, in the API, we could get at all data fields for the relevant dataset, without having to manually list them in the Expression builder area. Example: if we had a formula function called "AllFields()" that returns all fields. Then, supposing we had a huge data set with hundreds of fields, we could do something like Average(AllFields()) in order to average all of the fields without listing them individually.
And I know, the multi-field formula is there also, but it would still be handy to have this, especially in conjunction with the API, where I'd like to be able to write methods that cruise all data fields to do this or that. Thanks!
Please bring back the feature for showing the approximate file size for a workflow & dependencies when publishing/saving to the Gallery. This "feature" was part of 9.5 (see lower left in the attached screenshot). This is a useful indicator and helps highlight when there is a large external dependency that will get replicated onto the server when publishing.
An example of when this is useful:
When a publisher sees a large file size, they might change the dependency path from being a local path (that will result in a copy being published to the server) to a UNC path i.e. \\servername\path
It might also be useful to add the size information as a column in the "list view" in the Gallery.
With Version 10 of Alteryx Server Gallery, if new user signup is disabled, people see the following when clicking the sign in button:
If someone tries to fill out the "Join Now" section they then get:
In Alteryx Server Version 9.5, when new user sign up was disabled, the join now section of the prompt was not present. This is our prefered behavior. Another option would be to change the "Access denied" message to something more descriptive such as "New user sign up disabled."