Alteryx Server Ideas

When saving a workflow to the Gallery, I would like an option on the Save window to save directly to a collection. This can be an existing collection, or would have the ability to create a new collection. The current process requires you to log into the Gallery after saving the workflow and move it to the appropriate collection.

In regulated environments, like banks, there is a requirement to fully segment Alteryx Jobs so that people on either side of a Regulatory Wall cannot access each other's canvasses or results.

As an example:

- Public vs. private side in Broker/Dealer banks

- Compliance or HR or Finance need to be segmented from all other areas in most banks

What is needed here is for any canvasses belonging to each of these walled-off areas to be controlled so that they cannot be shared across the wall, and results cannot be viewed across these areas.   This also means that the Gallery Environment needs to be capable of being segmented fully within 1 installed environment.

CC: @rijuthav @jithinmony @HengHe @RajK @ydmuley @revathi @Deeksha @MPistone @Ari_Fuller @Arianna_Fuller @JoshKushner @samnelson @avinashbonu @Sunder_Sriram @Rahul_Thakur @Rahul_Singh

Currently when running an Alteryx Workflow from the gallery via the API, it doesn't get logged in the user interface in the same way that running it interactively in the gallery GUI does - a shame as it then becomes harder to know the traffic and performance of a workflow run in this way.  

Please provide the ability to bulk add/delete users to a gallery. This would be useful for on-boarding/off-boarding large companies, departments, and external customers. For public-facing galleries, this would provide us the ability to on-board/off-board entire customers of ours. 

My company, a very large organization, is in the early implementation phase of Alteryx right now. My company requires frequent password changes and we plan on making heavy use of Shared Connections since there are also many shared data sources. Unfortunately, this would mean that every time a credential has changed that affects a workflow, the credential holder would have to contact Server Administration (me), and I would have to update any Shared Connections or other assets that use those credentials. This problem is exacerbated by also having to manage user permissions and which users belong in each Subscription Right now, that is not much of a big deal, but as the number of users begins to scale, this could become a very daunting task.

My current solution is to create Subscriptions for each Department, Group, or Team and give one person from that Subscription Curator permissions. This enables each Department to work more autonomously and reduces the load for Server Admin. The issue is that there is no permission level between the publishing rights of an Artisan and the ubiquitous acces of a Curator. So, with my solution, any one of the Subsription Curators can start using connections they're not supposed to have access to or deleting/stopping scheduled flows, intentionally or otherwise.

I propose that we find a middle ground between Curator and Artisan, a (Studio) Moderator. This person can be assigned one or more subscriptions by a full Curator and will have Curator-like permission, but only to the assigned Subscriptions. This means that they will be able to add/modify Credentials, Connections, and/or Scheduled under the envelope of their Subscriptions, but they won't have access to any others. I believe that this solution will mitigate the possible overflow of tedium to the true Curators while allowing the powerful communal features of Alteryx be used to their full potential.

Not sure if this has already been suggested but I couldn't find it in the ideas...

It would be awesome if in the Gallery some better documentation could be created for the naming of the different private studios, collections, and districts. The naming causes some confusion because it is so different than most other products which causes confusion in our company.

It would be useful there was the concept of a description for Alteryx content, which was displayed within Gallery, as even with logical folders, naming conventions & tags when there are several hundred items available this additional metadata would be highly beneficial to users to know what the content they can see actually does. The ability to search this description would also be highly useful.

As we continue to build Alteryx Workflows for the business, there is a continued need for an organizational structure for saving and storing Alteryx Workflows within the Alteryx Gallery. Organizing the workflow repository through a "folder hierarchy" will allow users to quickly navigate and find the appropriate workflow. Currently, the workflows are listed in alphabetical order and requires the user to remember the Alteryx Workflow name and click to the proper page. 

Any enhancements to the Alteryx Gallery organization structure would be greatly appreciated!

Thank you, 

KK

We have the need to bulk-add users, and to bring in their information (full name; location; etc) from Active directory.

Right now, adding users is a 1:1 process which is highly painful.

Desire is to be able to take a list of Kerberos IDs, and bulk add them as users - and then select a group of them and permission either for the gallery; or for designer licenses.

cc: @revathi @avinashbonu @Deeksha

Hi,

I have an existing app in my company's gallery. I updated the app in the gallery to not allow others to download. I just made changes to the desktop version of the app and saved it to the gallery, then went thru the steps of replacing my existing gallery app with the new version (this part I like). BUT, after updating the app, when I went back into the app settings, the option for others to download was checked again. To me, the app should inherit anything that was manually done to it in the gallery, like making it not downloadable. Is it possible to have this changed in a future release?

Thanks!

Aliases are a really powerful tool, particularly when you have multiple environments (EG Test, Prod) and need a published workflow to work without any code changes (In particular in an IT or Release/Change Control model).  By configuring a system alias on your Test and Prod servers, code will dynamically point to the correct server.

However, aliases can be somewhat cumbersome if you have a lot of databases on a server, and those database names change by environment.  Effectively, you end up needing an alias for each Database, which runs into naming convention and standardization issues.

Having the ability to configure a "database value" or a "database alias" would do a lot to help this.  This could either be a file that would be attached (allowing for easy config changes without risk of modifying the underlying code structure) or a secondary tier of aliases, so that a connection string might go from:

aka:SQLSERVER (contains sqlserver and database information)

to:

aka:SQLSERVER||aka:database - so that at runtime Alteryx would evaluate the SQLSERVER alias and the database alias to create the correct connection string for that environment.