Alteryx Designer Desktop Ideas
Share your Designer Desktop product ideas - we're listening!Submitting an Idea?
Be sure to review our Idea Submission Guidelines for more information!
Submission GuidelinesFeatured Ideas
We have discussed on several occasions and in different forums, about the importance of having or providing Alteryx with order of execution control, conditional executions, design patterns and even orchestration.
I presented this idea some time ago, but someone asked me if it was posted, and since it was not, I’m putting it here so you can give some feedback on it.
The basic concept behind this idea is to allow us (users) to have:
- Design Patterns
- Repetitive patterns to be reusable.
- Select after and Input tool
- Drop Nulls
- Get not matching records from join
- Conditional execution
- Tell Alteryx to execute some logic if something happens.
- Record count
- Errors
- Any other condition
- Order of execution
- Need to tell Alteryx what to run first, what to run next, and so on…
- Run this first
- Execute this portion after previous finished
- Wait until “X” finishes to execute “Y”
- Orchestration
- Putting all together
This approach involves some functionalities that are already within the product (like exploiting Filtering logic, loading & saving, caching, blocking among others), exposed within a Tool Container with enhanced attributes, like this example:
The approach is to extend Tool Container’s attributes.
This proposition uses actual functionalities we already have in Designer.
So, basically, the Tool Container gets ‘superpowers’, with the addition of some capabilities like: Accepting input data, saving the contents within the container (to create a design pattern, or very commonly used sequence of tools chained together), output data, run the contents of the tools included in the container, etc.), plus a configuration screen like:
- Refers to the actual interface of the Tool Container.
- Provides the ability to disable a Container (and all tools within) once it runs.
- Idea based on actual behavior: When we enable or disable a Tool Container from an interface Tool.
- Input and output data to the container’s logic, will allow to pickup and/or save files from a particular container, to be used in later containers or persist data as a partial result from the entire workflow’s logic (for example updating a dimensions table)
- Based on actual behavior: Input & Output Data, Cache, Run Command Tools, and some macros like Prepare Attachment.
- Order of Execution: Can be Absolute or Relative. In case of Absolute run, we take the containers in order, executing their contents. If Relative, we have the options to configure which container should run before and after, block until previous container finishes or wait until this container finishes prior to execute next container in list.
- Based on actual behavior: Block until done, Cache, Find Replace, some interface Designer capabilities (for chained apps for example), macros’ basic behaviors.
- Conditional Execution: In order to be able to conditionally execute other containers, conditions must be evaluated. In this case, the idea is to evaluate conditions within the data, interface tools or Error/Warnings occurrence.
- Based on actual behavior: Filter tool, some Interface Tools, test Tool, Cache, Select.
- Notes: Documentation text that will appear automatically inside the container, with options to place it on top or below the tools, or hide it.
This should end a brief introduction to the idea, but taking it a little further, it will allow even to have something like an Orchestration layout, where the users can drag and drop containers or patterns and orchestrate them in a solution, like we can do with the Visual Layout Tool or the Interactive Chart tool:
I'm looking forward to hear what you think.
Best
Hello all,
As of today, we can easily copy or duplicate a table with in-database tool.This is really useful when you want to have data in development environment coming from production environment.
But can we for real ?
Short answer : no, we can't do it in these cases :
-partitions
-any constraints such as primary-foreign keys
But even if these ideas would be implemented, this means manually setting these parameters.
So my proposition is simply a "clone table"' tool that would clone the table from the show create table statement and just allow to specify the destination path (base.table)
Best regards,
Simon
Hello all,
Here the issue : I have a workflow in my One Drive folder
In that workflow, I use a macro that writes a file with a relative path (..\6_Big_Data\EN\.csv ) :
Strangely, it doesn't work and the error message seems to relate to a folder that doesn't exist (but also, not the one I have set)
ErrorLink: Output Data (1): https://community.alteryx.com/t5/*/*/ta-p/724327?utm_source=designer&utm_medium=resultsgrid|Cannot access the folder C:\Users\saubert\OneDrive - Business & Decision\Documents\B&D_Market\6_Big_Data\EN\.
I really would like that to work :)
Best regards,
Simon
Hello all,
I'm currently learning Pythin language and there is this cool feature : you can multiply a string
Pretty cool, no? I would like the same syntax to work for Tableau.
Best regards,
Simon
I can't even count how often I looked at an Excel, CSV or even YXDB file, where I KNEW that it was generated by Alteryx, but I couldn't remember the workflow. Currently, I have to simply go through all workflows I ever build and see if I can find it.
Theoretically, I could use a text-search across all workflows and see if I can find the output names - problem here: Most of my output filenames are generated dynamically on the run.
It would be amazing if Alteryx could simply write the Workflow name (maybe even path) into the metadata of a file.
(Screenshot from Google, as my os is set to German)
How about, we write "This file was created with by "Create Controlling Reports.yxmd on 2023-02-06 with Alteryx Designer 2021.4.298434" in the field 'Comments'?
This would make it extremely easy to find what workflow the file generated. I think it would be an option to talk about "filepath" instead of filename, but the filepath could include the local machine name, which might include GDPR information.
@Community: Is there any additional information that you'd like to see in the metadata?
Best
Alex
Hello,
Just like Monetdb or Vertica, Clickhouse is a column-store database, claiming to be the fastest in the world. It's available on Cloud (like Snowflake), linux and macos (and here for free, it's open-source). it's also very well ranked in analytics database https://db-engines.com/en/system/ClickHouse and it would be a good differenciator with competitors.
https://clickhouse.com/
it has became more popular than Greenplum that is supported : (black snowflake, red greenplum, orange clickhouse)
Best regards,
Simon
Hello all,
MonetDB is a very light, fast, open-source database available here :
https://www.monetdb.org/
Really enjoy it, works pretty well with Tableau and it's a good introduction to column-store concepts and analytics with SQL.
It has also gained a lot of popularity these last years :
https://db-engines.com/en/ranking_trend/system/MonetDB
Sadly, Alteryx does not support it yet.
Best regards
Hi UX interested parties,
Here are some ideas for you to consider:
1. These lines are BORING and UNINFORMATIVE. I'd like to understand (pic = 1,000 words) more when looking at a workflow.
- A line could communicate:
- Qty of Records
- Size of Data
- Is the data SORTED
- What sort order
- Quality of Data
If you look at lines A, B, C in the picture above. Nothing is communicated. Weight of line, color of line, type of line, beginning line marker/ending line marker, these are all potential ways that we could see a picture of the data without having to get into browse everywhere to see the information. If we hover over the data connection, even more information could appear (e.g. # of records, size of file) without having to toggle the configuration parameters.
2. Wouldn't it be nice to not have to RUN a workflow to know last SAVED metadata (run) of a workflow? I'd like to open a "saved" workflow and know what to expect when I run the workflow. Heck, how long does it take the beast to run is something that we've never seen unless we run it.
3. I'd like to set the metadata to display SORT keys, order. Sort1 Asc, Sort 2 Desc .... This sort information is very helpful for the engine and I'll likely post about that thought. As a preview, when a JOIN tool has sorted data and one of the anchors is at EOF, then why do we need to keep reading from the other anchor? There won't be another matched record (J) anchor. In my example above, we don't ask for the L/R outputs, so why worry about the rest of the join?
4. Have you ever seen a map (online) that didn't display watermark information? I think that the canvas experience should allow for a default logo (like mine above, but transparent) in the lower right corner of the canvas that is visible at all times. Having the workflow name at the top in a tab is nice, but having it display as a watermark is handy.
5. Once the workflow has RUN, all anchors are the same color. How about providing GREY/White or something else on EMPTY anchors instead of the same color? This might help newbies find issues in JOIN configuration too.
6. If the tool has ERRORs you put a RED exclamation mark. I despise warnings, but how about a puke colored question mark? With conversion errors, the lines could be marked to let you know the relative quantity of conversion errors (system messages have a limit)
Just a few top of mind things to consider ....
Cheers,
Mark
I love Workflow Meta info, especially the ability to put the Author, the search tags,the version, the description, etc...
But why can't we use it as Engine Constant? It doesn't seem very hard to implement and it would change life for development.
This idea has arisen from a conversation with a colleague @Carlithian where we were trying to work out a way to remove tools from the canvas which might be redundant, for example have you added a select tool to the canvas which hasn't been configured to change a data type or rename a field. So we were looking for ways of identifying in the workflow xml for tools which didn't have a configuration applied to them.
This highlighted to me an issue with something like the data cleanse tool, which is a standard macro.
The xml view of the data cleanse configuration looks like this:
<Configuration>
<Value name="Check Box (135)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (136)">False</Value>
<Value name="List Box (11)">""</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (84)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (117)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (15)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (109)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (122)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (53)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (58)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (70)">False</Value>
<Value name="Check Box (77)">False</Value>
<Value name="Drop Down (81)">upper</Value>
</Configuration>
As it is a macro, the default labelling of the drop downs is specified in the xml, if you were to do something useful with it wouldn't it be much nicer if the interface tools were named properly - such as:
So when you look at the xml of the workflow it's clearer to the user what is actually specified.
- Shifty on: Copy Tool Configuration
- simonaubert_bd on: A formula to get DCM connection name and type (and...
-
NicoleJ
on:
Disable mouse wheel interactions for unexpanded dr...
- haraldharders on: Improve Text Input tool
- simonaubert_bd on: Unique key detector tool
- TUSHAR050392 on: Read an Open Excel file through Input/Dynamic Inpu...
- jackchoy on: Enhancing Data Cleaning
- NeoInfiniTech on: Extended Concatenate Functionality for Cross Tab T...
- AudreyMcPfe on: Overhaul Management of Server Connections
-
AlteryxIdeasTea
m on: Expression Editors: Quality of life update
