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
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).
Apparently I click too fast sometimes when saving a project, but there are a number of times where the workflow name hasn't populated when saving to the gallery and it ends up saving a blank file name. This is a pain because I can't do anything with the one in the gallery because there is nowhere to click on it, so I can't use the replace function and have to re-save it and re-add it back into any collections that it was in.
I realize that I just need to slow down, but I do this frequently enough where it absolutely drives me crazy. Being able to change file names in the gallery would be a big plus instead of just using the replace option.
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.
When saving a workflow to the gallery, none of the options I could choose from Set workflow credentials validates a workflow successfully when using database connections due to missing permission on the server (No specific Run As is configured on the Server). Apparently the server validates the workflow as following:
User is not required to specify credentials:No possibility to add credentials when running the workflow on the server. In that case, the workflow validates database connections with errors due to missing permission on the server. This error was expected.
User must specify their own credentials: This option is the most appropriate in case of working with database connections with regard to our use cases and security policies. Unfortunately this option is only enabled when the workflow is saved on the server already and run from the gallery. In case of the validation step when saving the workflow to the gallery, the server evaluates with the system user of the server. As a result, the validation fails. In that case, I expected the server to run the validation with the user from the Alteryx Designer.
Always run this workflow with these credentials: This option is not appropriate in terms of our security policy, since the workflow is permanently set with the users credentials.
So my suggestion would be to:
Otherwise is see no benefit of the validation feature (with respect to our use cases and security policies)
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.
Dearest colleageues and comrades (Romans, countrymen?):
Have you ever queued up your jobs only to have them block your regularly scheduled programming? Imagine a world where, assuming you had multiple worker nodes, you can direct and prioritise your jobs on your terms.
This is what I am suggesting.
I've recently worked with Alteryx support, and they turned me on to a QoS setting in Alteryx Server settings. Peep this like a marshmallow chick in hot pink:
After learning from the great Server Master Kevin Powney (blessed be his name), I learnt that there are currently 3 'channels' that this QoS variable governs. 0 is the highest priority used for workflows. 4 is used for chained apps. 6 is used for gallery service requests.
This will not do.
Why? Well, for one: hello arcane/memorisation.
Secondly, where is my control? I'm a millenial dammit! Service me!
So, my idea, that I want you to vote so highly on as to save yourself any myself a lot of hassle, is to allow a custom QoS variable to be a traffic variable. And here's how it works:
Example time! [cheers, candy thrown]
In my current situation, we have some jobs that are network-intensive (database calls), and jobs that are processing-intensive (CPU hogs doing hard-core maths).
The network-intensive jobs run on the weekends so that we have the data in the morning on Monday. The processing-intensive jobs need to finish, but suck up all the CPU power. For the last couple of weeks, we've unsuccessfully run these jobs over the weekend. The downside is that since we cannot control how traffic flows (and we only have the 0/4/6 options in QoS, of which these only fit in the 0 lane [breath, sorry]) the CPU-heavy jobs have blocked more critical network jobs.
If we had two paths, we could assign the CPU jobs to lane 1 and the network jobs to lane 0 and they can run in parallel. And then my boss is happy. We like happy bosses, right?
Vote this up! My boss is awesome!
Thanks for your ear,
Hail Caesar or something.
-Cedric
As an Admin, I would like to be able to see, from the Gallery, a single place where the history of workflows that have been run is displayed. Right now I can only see workflows running or queued. I would like to be able to look back at past executions and see status, runtime, errors, etc.
This data is currently available in Designer on our Alteryx Server. But right now our system is just one environment. I'm not sure if when we expand to multiple Gallery and Worker machines where I will have to look for workflow history.
Also, Workflow schedules can only be seen in Gallery, and not Designer. So it would be nice to have everything in one place.
Rather than schedule to put things on the 5th day or the 14th day of a month, we often want to schedule our flows to run on the 5th business day or the 14th business day. I know that the term 'business day' means different things in different parts of the world, but I think it would be a feature that many reporting-oriented departments would enjoy. Let people specify a formula or have a table to go off of for their definition of 'business day' and it should be easy to implement.
I would add a <scheduler> label to this but there isn't one.
Hi all,
I would like to suggest the idea to make the ability to add a graphic to an Interface on the server as well.
Currently, the function only seems to work on Desktop, but having it work on the Gallery as well would be very nice.
Especially if we could have the image be horizontally oriented as well as vertically, depending on our other interface tools.
Would love to hear any other related comments or ideas!
Alteryx Server does not presently support any file encryption systems. Many people need to encrypt there Fileshare as a secure measurement and use safeguard lan encrypted. Please provide a solution so workers are able to read and write encrypted files through safeguard lan encrypted.
Apologies for posting this in the community ideas forum - couldn't find a better location.
There are a rich collection of Alteryx Tools which are housed in the public Gallery - and a sub-set of these are created by and certified by Alteryx. Could we provide a mechanism to filter to only show these Alteryx Certified assets so that we can see which have the high level of trust?
Many thanks
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.
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.
The WebDAV protocol isn't supported by the Alteryx Scheduler, due to the security constraints associated with connecting to SharePoint. This is a server side limitation that should be aligned with the ability of the desktop to preform the WebDAV action.
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.
Can we have search option enabled in Gallery Admin > Jobs to filter on running jobs to specific ones or to check specific job schedules.
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.
In some organizations, it may be difficult, if not impossible, for permissions to be applied or exemptions made to enable wide ranges of users the “Logon as batch job” permission needed to run workflows in a Server with the current run-as credential capability.
If possible, could the Alteryx process still run as the server admin or "Run As" account, but enable the workflow to access the various different data sources (windows authentication) using specific credentials entered when running the workflow. So while the whole process runs as Service Account A, the access to databases, file systems, etc. may be done using their own specified credentials.
Some of this can be accomplished today by embedding credentials in database connections, but this isn’t an ideal scenario, and a more holistic solution that covers a wider array (or all supported) data sources would be preferred.
I'm not sure if this is too similar to this server idea
but I'd love to see the ability to add webhooks to Alteryx Server to launch a workflow. I believe that is how Flow (now PowerAutomate) can run an event. I had to spend hours figuring out how to build a "Flow" workflow which would have taken me minutes in Designer. For example, when I receive a new MS Forms Survey submission, I can shape the data and build a sharepoint list, rather than waiting for whatever interval I set in the scheduler.
Everyone on our team would benefit from having access to each other's workflows -- including workflow results and scheduling -- but publishing them to gallery where any user in the company can run it/ download it would present a security issue. Functionality that is not met with Collections. I found a similar idea, but not anything that encompasses the whole thing.
It would be of immense value to have a Team Gallery - something intermediate to the company gallery and the private collection. This would enable our team to have access to modify, publish, schedule workflows as a team.
Usuario | Cantidad |
---|---|
5 | |
2 | |
2 | |
2 | |
2 |