I've seen various solutions/workarounds but this seems to be a table-stakes ask? When scheduling a workflow I should be able to specify which parameter values to run with. Just two of many use case examples -
Use case #1 - a single analytic app could be scheduled multiple times, each schedule specifying a different line of business
Use case #2 - credentials, allow the user to schedule a workflow with their saved credentials. When their credentials change all they would have to do is update the schedule parameters
(If you know a better way I'm all ears, not the API thought that isn't a bad way to do it, just not super Easy)
I would like to see the enhancement of being able to schedule a start and stop time for specific jobs that need to run multiple times per day, so they don't run during the nightly backup periods of the Alteryx server. This can cause the daily backups of the Alteryx Gallery to fail. Currently SQL Server Management Studio/SQL Server has the function to able to schedule start and stop times for specific job. Currently Scheduler page on Alteryx Gallery/Server lacks this feature.
SQL Server Management Studio
Schedules on Alteryx Gallery/Server
Using current version of the server - you can see that there is no OAuth managed or published API endpoint for canvas delete (screenshot 1). However this API does CLEARLY exist as you can see if you inspect what happens when you hit the delete button (screenshot 2 clearly shows the API being called - but it requires user login security token)
Please can you enable this API for OAuth - the API already exists, it just needs to be exposed with the others.
I would like to set a retry count when scheduling a job, and also to specify to duration in between retries, e.g. job fails, but then will retry to run 3 times with a 5 minute wait in between each retry.
Also would like a radio button next to all workflow results, so when you get a list of failed jobs you can click all the jobs and then hit rerun. This should be complimented with select all functionality. This will prevent me from having to go into each job and rerunning, i.e. save me loadsa clicks!
Ability to change the default workflow settings when to also include [Others may view this workflow's history] in a similar way to the other attributes in workflow settings that are set by default. This would prove beneficial for workflows which are shared across a large team and need to be run on a consistent frequency and are not run headless. The inability to set this by default leaves a risk that the setting remains unchecked and more than one user triggers that workflow in a given month which could result in a material impact if the output of that workflow is posting to another system in the firm.
It would be good to have a new field with the owner of the data connection, when users asks to be part of a data connection, we should know who is the identified owner to contact and ask for approval.
Issue: When Workflow names have similar beginnings on server a user cannot distinguish between them because the columns on this GUI are not expandable as would be expected. A user has to make their browser larger and all columns open proportionately.
Solution: Change column settings so users can drag column widths to make changes. A bonus would be to allow a user to set a default along with an option to always auto expand all.
The publishing endpoint, a POST to api/admin/v1/workflows/, is useless whenever workflows, apps, or macros contain Gallery Data Connections. The workflow will get published but valid Gallery Data Connections are ignored and the apps will not run.
Please add the same dependency checks against Gallery Data Connections as is performed when a workflow or app is manually published from Designer.
This might be considered a subset of the Idea Server API to extract / submit workflows.
Thank you for your consideration.
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.
Add Admin ability to place the Alteryx Service (Engine) into Maintenance mode allowing current workflows to complete, but all new workflow processing moved into Queue to allow for server configuration and/or maintenance.
Currently, if I want to make a small configuration change (like a memory setting in the Runtime settings) I have to hunt for a quiet window or the lowest level of activity to kill the service (and the running jobs).
It would be helpful to flip a 'switch' and have all new jobs go into 'Queue' allowing for the change and service stop/restart ... then pick right back up with the queue in configured order. (execution time, priority level, etc...)
When saving to our company's gallery, we must deselect dozens of assets for our numerous workflows every time they need to be resaved, which is very frequent.
I would like to suggest a select/deselect all button under manage workflow assets. This would save a considerable amount of time.
My team utilizes the Gallery API extensively and have found that we have processes that the API has listed as actively running, but cannot be found via the Controller's GUI. As a gallery artisan, I can call flows via API, but cannot cancel these executions unless I reach out to the administrator group to kill them manually.
It would be extremely helpful to add an endpoint with the ability to submit a specific job GUID and have the server/controller kill the execution of that flow and clear up the server capacity. This could then be scheduled on a regular basis as a maintenance task to keep the server clean.
I am noticing what I think it's a big gap in terms of turnover and job changes. Even though you can add workflows to a Collection for development and update purposes. Only the original owner/publisher can see the version history for a workflow. At least that appears to be the case in 2020.1
Is there any discussion for the road map to include a way to transfer the ownership of a workflow from one user to another? this would alleviate the need to publish a brand new version and then reset all the scheduling.
My team currently uses the API to call a large number of workflows via a Python based scheduler process. We use this currently by having ~10 users in a single subscription (Private Studio).
All of the Private Studio sites on the Alteryx help state that they are going away in the near future to be replaced by individual studios and Shared Collections.
From our testing, this would kill our processing as we cannot have an API for 1 Private Studio call workflows from a different private studio even if they have access through a shared collection.
Are there plans to adjust the API endpoints in the future to better account for this?
Our IT department is looking to move to the Collections based structure now in preparation for the removal of the current Studio setup, so another question is when the structural update is planned to go into effect (which server version should we expect this?) so that we can get ready to account for this or if we can ask them to back off a little.
Hello Alteryx team,
I would like to propose idea that was mentioned on the community but there is no solution either.
The issue is related to Qlik Analytics Samples and error that it is causing with wrong path error for default macros like eg.CountRecords.
Submitting this idea based on the Case #00361430.
We are trying to do alteryx workflow chaining based on workflows available in alteryx gallery, but this option is not currently available in alteryx right now and we are raising this idea to enable this feature in upcoming release or existing version patches.
Currently couple of methods available; saving the workflow in network share drive and chain the alteryx workflow based on events or run another analytical app on success.
The disadvantage of these methods are,
1. We cannot have version history maintained for the workflows in network share drive.
2. We cannot able to run a specific workflow in chaining as the workflows are packaged together.
For scheduled jobs, there should be an option to include performance profiling in output logs globally. Basically we are looking at how we can understand which custom macros are in use, and in which workflows, and one way to do this would be to get the output logs into another tool (i.e., splunk), and then set up some queries there. It would work, but I would have to tell N developers to go set performance profiling on, re-upload their workflows, ect.
But why not have a switch on server / gallery that just turns this feature on globally for every scheduled workflow?
Thank you for attending my TED talk on why performance profiling should have an option to be set globally.
*This is an idea from @cneivam from the Portuguese Community*
With 2020.3, the new Groups feature came into light, which is great, but seems like it was only half-thought.
It would have been nicely complemented with some API endpoints that would allow managing the groups' members - add, remove, list members, etc.
Seems like the API on Alteryx is like 100 steps behind and seems like the new developments are not considering adding APIs for the new released features. I feel this is a product roadmap issue.
As an admin, I would like far more ways to automate managing the Server/Gallery than the ones currently provided by Alteryx.
Integration with AD would be nice as well, we use SAML, and would like to have the option to import AD groups that would sync automatically in Alteryx - same way Tableau has those groups that are imported directly from AD.
It would be nice having the ability to alter the timeout of the file upload on Alteryx Analytic Apps uploading to the Gallery. Having it restrained by time and not file size makes it so that users with poorer internet speeds will not even be able to upload moderate sized files.
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.
I created before a post about managing chained workflows using the API.
After reaching out the support, it turns out to be impossible, which is unfortunate.
So I post this idea here, in case anyone is needing it too.
Feels free to ask me details if needed.
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.