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
Starting with Windows Sever 2016 edition one could use Docker containers technology on windows environments. My idea is to dynamically convert Designer jobs/workflows to Docker containers at runtime.
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
For a given DB connection - there's a need to be able to specify the owner for this specific connection.
Reason for this is that the credentials for a given DB are not all managed by the central admin team - so we'd want to say that a given DB connection is owned by a particular person so that this can be updated frequently as passwords change.
For resilience - our particular policy would be to have 2 owners so that if one person resigns or changes roles, it invalidates the primary and reverts to the secondary - and then asks the new Primary to create a backup owner.
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).
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?
At my organization, we have many workflows on our server that take data from one database and store it on another. We would love the ability for an alert system that warns us when a job fails so that we can solve it immediately and not risk the chance of not noticing until a few weeks or months later.
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.
While in a workspace or collection, it would be great to be able to select multiple workflows and perform a bulk action on them (e.g. delete). This would help cleaning up unused workflows quicker.
Thank you
Today in managing Alteryx server, we manually configure new connections using the front end. However, this has some potential drawbacks as it makes it hard to easily track change history, or make bulk updates to multiple strings, and it also leaves room for user error on configuration.
In this case I'm pretty specifically looking to modify aliases on the server itself. I'm not particularly concerned with distribution to a wider audience, and the usernames/passwords associated in this case should not be available for use locally by users. As a part of this, I am trying to identify a method to reduce or eliminate the need for anyone (including the data connection manager) to need to know the password for the specified accounts. As some of these accounts may be used by multiple systems, it would be significantly simpler to integrate this maintenance into existing automated processes, rather than have a manual step to update the Alteryx connection values on the Gallery.
This is specifically a challenge today with regards to specific usernames or passwords which need to be stored. Alteryx saves these values using machine-level encryption, but that is difficult to generate automatically. Having a supported method that would easily allow creation of this file with password-level information would greatly improve maintenance of the Alteryx Server, particularly from an IT automation perspective.
Please could all log file paths on Server have the option to change their location, including
C:\ProgramData\Alteryx\ErrorLogs\AlteryxE2
To enable all log files to be written to an alternative drive than the installation.
The benefit it to prevent excessive space usage on the C: drive
Support have advised there is no way to alter the path or limit these log files by number or size.
Many thanks.
in version 2019.3, with artisan role, I able to add workflow to collection in the workflow page.
I not sure for later version, but in version 2021.4, only curator can do so.
If I uploaded a workflow, designer already give me a link to the workflow, hence if I can add the workflow to the collection.
it goes through 2 pages within 2mins (max). it is very fast for me.
but now, I have to go back to the homepage > collection > add workflow > wait eternal time for server to get the list of workflow > select it > click add.
it extra 5~ steps. with min 10mins extra time. and if the number of workflows larger and larger,
it has chance that it fails to load the list and have to wait another 10mins, and another and another endless 10mins.
so 2mins > endless 10mins? please add back this feature.
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.
I would like to suggest the idea of being able to handle row-level security data sources in a more seamless way using Kerberos passthrough, where Alteryx Gallery will pass the information that User A is running the workflow to the underlying DB and will authenticate as User A.
We have many workflows that are built to handle different queries of a database that are reliant on knowing who is running the workflow in Gallery. We also have many regional workers, and we want to keep the administration of these connections to the data as simple as possible.
For more information, check out the Community thread on this subject.
As a Gallery Admin I would like to be able to add and remove a user from local groups on the User page.
I realise that this would only work for local groups and that AD groups would need to be excluded (and indicated as unavailable for editing)
On the Users page it is quick and easy to see what Role each user has - UNLESS they have been assigned the "Default" role in which case it will depend on Gallery Default Role and which Group(s) they are assigned to.
I propose an additional column be added to the page to show the Effective Role for each user. The purpose of this change is to allow an administrator to quickly and easily confirm the effective Role of any Gallery use by viewing the User page, without having to check the user's group membership and the Role assignment that those groups provide.
For those users with a assigned Role other than "Default" that value will obviously match the assigned Role.
For users assigned the "Default" Role the page should show the result that would be returned by the appropriate permission resolution code when determining their effective Role from the Group membership and the Gallery Default.
[Screen image is from 2020.4 - with my suggested positioning for Effective Role added]
As a further enhancement a set of checkboxes showing the value of the special permissions e.g. Create Collections, would be good but might require a more significant re-design of the page and would only be saving a single click. I suggest instead that it might be useful to have an enhanced filter view of users which allows an administrator to view e.g. all users who can Create Collections etc.
Hello everyone,
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.
Thanks.
The dcm admin apis look promising. I would love if they could add put endpoints for sharing/execution and sharing/collaboration for admins. There is already a delete command for those two endpoints
I remember when i started using Alteryx and the gallery i was able to display the results of a workflow run and then copy a value from the screen to complete checks on.
Now when i run a workflow and the .yxdb results and displayed ever if its one record i have to download a file and open it just to copy the value.
Can we not get the screen to allow highlight and control c of text as required?
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.
| User | Likes Count |
|---|---|
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 | |
| 1 |