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
Hi
It will be great to make visibility of workflow execution results to other users in same subscription.
As of now, only schedules are visible to all users in a subscription, but not the workflow execution results executed by a user to other users in same subscription.
This will avoid duplicate execution of same workflow by multiple user in a team as it will provide option to cross check the execution results by other users, if executed already, before execution of same workflow.
Regards
Haribabu Muppaneni
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.
We have several workflows that call other workflows (i.e. via the Conditional Runner macro) but are running into some versioning challenges since we moved to storing all of our workflows in our gallery. When I publish a workflow that references another workflow, I can bundle it up with the workflow when I save it, but then Alteryx places that workflow into the /externals directory, which is obvioulsy not the same as the workflow that we've saved to our gallery. An example:
I have two workflows in our gallery...one that generates a TDE and one that calls that one if certain file availability and time conditions are met. The "master" version of each is in the gallery, which is what we want...
...but when I load or save the Sales Analytics workflow in Designer, I have to bundle the TDE workflow with the main workflow in order for it to run from Gallery. But now I've created a disconnected version of the TDE workflow and if I forget to update it when I update the version in the Gallery, I'll be running the wrong version. I know I could store these workflows in a network directory, but that seems to defeat the purpose of the Gallery.
If I'm not missing something insanely obvious, I think this would be a very important feature enhancement, namely the ability to pull in a Gallery workflow into another workflow.
Currently, DCM credentials appear to only be used in combination with a DCM Data Source.
For ease of use for my end users (non-Designers), I would like my end users to be able to save a user ID and password as a standalone DCM credential. Then, I want the user to have the option to select that credential for use in two places:
Having this functionality would remove administrative burden from both our Designers and the end users they support.
Currently, this is completely manual with whoever is assuming the schedule creating it under their profile and then the old schedule being deleted.
This can happen often in organization where a user leaves the company or assumes a new role requiring some else to maintain those schedules. It would be convenient if there was an option to reassign the owner of a schedule to simply this process.
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 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).
Currently when we need to disable/enable schedule on API,we need to update all the schedule info,could you provide only one attribute to disable.
Can we just update on parameter
"enabled": true, --> "enabled": false
current update example,we need update all
{
"workflowId": "string",
"ownerId": "string",
"iteration": {
"iterationType": "Once",
"startTime": "2022-09-06T08:01:52.717Z",
"endTime": "2022-09-06T08:01:52.717Z",
"hourlyContract": {
"hours": 0,
"minutes": 0
},
"dailyContract": {
"runOnlyWorkWeek": true
},
"weeklyContract": {
"daysOfWeek": [
"Sunday"
]
},
"monthlyContract": {
"simpleDayOfMonth": true,
"dayOfMonth": 0,
"occurrence": 0,
"dayOfWeek": "Sunday"
},
"customContract": {
"daysOfMonth": [
0
],
"months": [
0
]
}
},
"name": "string",
"comment": "string",
"priority": "Default",
"workerTag": "string",
"enabled": true,
"credentialId": "string"
}
Hey Alteryx Dev Gurus -
I've got a situation wherein the user runs something in Gallery, and complains. I have to log in as that user to view the output files that came back out. As a super user, I should be able to have all seeing ability! Thanks!
brian
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.
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.
Hello all,
As of today, if you want to give the Alteryx Gallery user an Excel with your data out of your worfklow, you MUST design an Excel Report with Report tools.
However :
1/ It's highly time consuming to design the report
2/ It leads to many errors, especially on column size : a quick research on Alteryx community gives you several hundred topics
3/ the excel output works really fine
This is frustrating as hell for users !
Best regards,
Simon
When opening a canvas - it is possible to open from the gallery, which is important in a team environment.
However - as you work on this canvas - if you hit save, it does not save a new version to the server and increment the original (as would happen on sharepoint) - instead it asks you to create a new file.
Please can you change this behaviour as follows:
- If I open from the gallery then when I save I'm updating the same Gallery asset and incrementing the version ID by 1.
- The only time I would save in a new file is if I use Save As; and explicitly pick a new file.
cc: @jalvarezv
There are two key APIs that we use for extracting canvasses for governance & surveillance:
- the Workflows API which lists all canvasses on the server;
- and the API call which returns a packaged version of the application by AppID
Unfortunately - when we query for all workflows to get the first list - there is no flag to indicate that a subset of these are actually deleted. The result is that you need to make the second call to find this out which is wasteful.
Please add a "deleted" flag to the Workflows API so that we can identify which applications have been deleted without having to call the specific App ID post.
CC: @jalvarezv
We are taking an incremental feed of all server canvasses in order to look for patterns - however there is no option on the server admin APIs (the Workflow API specifically) that allow you to filter by date.
Please can you add to this API to allow API users to specify an upload/updated date filter and only take items after this date.
cc: @jalvarezv
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.
@SteveA did an article about server logging a few years ago which was very helpful.
https://community.alteryx.com/t5/Engine-Works-Blog/A-deeper-dive-into-Server-logging/ba-p/22389
... and in the training events at Inspire this year there was a session on how to find and interpret server logs.
it would be very useful for large server environments to move away from discrete log files as much as possible, and instead move towards a world where the logs are stored in a data format, and one logging infra is used for all so that an admin team can see these all in one place.
Granted - the initial boot-up of a server, where it needs to connect to the logging DB is going to be a challenge - but after this initial primary boot sequence it would be great if all server logs and logging events were stored in a database of some kind so that we can analyze and collect events. That way, server admins can have a great UI experience; as well as a great analytical experience without having to regex through multiple different .LOG files.
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
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?