Alteryx Server Ideas

Share your Server product ideas - we're listening!
Submitting an Idea?

Be sure to review our Idea Submission Guidelines for more information!

Submission Guidelines
Don't forget to submit your entry for the Excellence Awards by October 30! | Need more information about the program? Check out the blog here

Featured Ideas


Similar to other code/software repository, it would be nice to have the ability to add a message to the reason why a workflow is updated/modified for users of a collection with access can easily review and revert back to older versions quickly.


Fix typo in introduction to user guide



As a part of the installation process or Configuration setting for Alteryx Server , can there be an option added to turn on "Subscription API" enabled for ever


I would like the ability to add Groups to a collection as well as individual users. This would make things a lot easier for situations where large sets of users needed to be added to a collection at once, or removed at once.


It used to be possible to create a robust user profile within the gallery, with many additional user details fields available. However all have been taken away leaving only a name and email address as a user profile.


Please bring back those user details as having additional information about the user always beneficial. If internal to the company, sometimes I need to know what department they are from or what office. And if external to the company, I need to know what organization they are from.


Having no additional user information can cause a lot of confusion, especially if any two users share a name since I don't know if it's the same user with a new email, or a different user completely.



There is a strong need for more APIs to be introduced in Alteryx Server so that our Admin teams can provide automated solutions to our users. My understanding is that a lot of these will be introduced into Alteryx Analytics Hub however, it is also needed in Alteryx Server.


I would propose that the internal APIs for Collections and Scheduler be exposed to the Admin Key/Secrets so that we can use these APIs to move our Users workflows directly to their collection or automatically schedule for them, if needed. It seems that all this would take would be to release the Authorization from internal to the Admin on the API.


APIs I am requesting be released:

  • PUT .../gallery/api/collections/{collectionID}/apps/{appID}/
  • POST .../gallery/api/scheduler/

At some point we would like Alteryx Gallery to support SSO via SAML and Authorization via AD groups. The way I want is to have Authentication via SAML and Authorization via AD groups. For instance one of our apps Tableau: It does authentication via SAML (SSO) and for authorization, we import AD groups into Tableau thrice a day(stores the groups in a .xml file), once the groups are in the Tableau, we secure the objects within Tableau using that LDAP groups (which kind of become local groups after import). Basically the userid after the successful authentication step is used by the app for authorization.

I just stated Tableau as one of the ways to implement Authentication and Authorization for an enterprise app. If Alteryx Gallery needs to be an enterprise app, you will need to look into this idea. 




We have configured the service account for Alteryx services on workers, controllers and Gallery. Kindly go through the below problem statement and current scenario and help to provide solution.

I will appreciate if we can setup a 30 minutes call and discuss on it.


Purpose/Current Design :

  1. Our purpose was to on board the account in EPV-AIM/gMSA solution so that password won’t be hard-coded anywhere in the config for service LAN account.
  2. Use same LAN service account to run the workflow on workers and write the output at destination paths [ Shared paths, Mailboxes]

Problem Statement  :

As we have added service LAN account  in multiple AD groups [ global and local ] it has become member of 440+ groups which has resulted in the approx.. token size to 8421.

Active directory has a limit of having approx.. token size to 10000 (10k) for LAN accounts and after that it will fail to authenticate with AD ; which will result in failure of starting Alteryx services.


Please refer below link to know what exactly issue we are facing and looking solution from Product team[Alteryx].



We are looking from the Alteryx team :

  1. Find a solution and provide some enhancement where we can use multiple (more than one) LAN accounts to run the workflows.
  2. In Large scale when we are running workflows of different team’s it is obvious that LAN ID will be member of multiple AD groups and it will reach to Token bloat threshold.
  3. We are looking something which can be provided as solution within the same setup to add multiple accounts or any other solution .


We already explored the option you suggested [] but as per our firm’s password policy we cannot save/use/withdraw privilege account passwords.

Because if we go with the suggested option we have to add the particular accounts in Windows server privilege group [ Log on as service, App_Security Logon locally and run batch job].

To meet compliant policy ; Any account which is privilege should be considered as app to app account and it should be integrated with Microsoft’s gMSA or CyberArk’s EPV-AIM solution to be on boarded account in vault. [ No human interaction with account ]


Feel free to reach out to me for any additional clarifications.

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.


It would be great if we can set the priority of a job when scheduling a workflow through either the Designer UI or through AlteryxService addtoqueue command

In my organization we primarily schedule jobs through these avenues and this would bring them up to par with the scheduling capabilities of Gallery


For example:



^ add an optional parameter that takes enum value {Low, Medium, High, Critical}



Designer UI

Add a dropdown that takes an enum {Low, Medium, High, Critical}






I know the Alteryx server supports auto-scaling up and out as of now. Alteryx Servers should also support auto-scaling down and in.  


Alteryx Server API should be allowed to publish the workflow in the gallery. 


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).


In a heavily used server environment, and depending on how workflows are deployed, it is possible to accumulate a vast number of "one off" workflows that could/should be deleted  as they would never be used again. In one of our environments we have over 1 million of these.


Currently we are manually deleting them 500 at a time but have asked if there is a way to script the delete process to make it more efficient. We have been told that to really delete a workflow you would need to touch at least 4 collections.


Can we have a Delete workflow API in one of the next releases in order to address this issue?


Thank you


Tom Diroff


Can we add an ability to manually adjust the order of workflows in a collection? I don't think we should have to go and click the column to sort each time if we want them in alphabetical order. It looks better for the end user to have everything nice an arranged when you have multiple processes in each collection.


Links included in the notification emails sent to users (e.g. links to collections/workflows in our Private Gallery) or copied from the browser address bar only works for public workflows or for workflows in your private studio.

If the workflow is in a collection shared with you, clicking on the link takes you to what seems to be the gallery page for the workflow asking you to sign in, but after you sign-in you are redirected to the gallery home page and not back to the workflow page.

The same occurs regardless if you're already signed-in or not.

This was related to support case: 00352021

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.


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.



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)

6-25-2020 5-39-35 PM.png

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. 


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.

Top Liked Authors