Many developers working with SharePoint Online discover that while Microsoft Graph API provides access to lists, items, and metadata, it does not currently support retrieving, creating, or managing SharePoint List Views. As a result, developers often need to fall back to SharePoint REST API for view-related operations.

From an architecture and developer experience perspective:

• Should Microsoft Graph become the single API layer for all SharePoint operations?
• Is maintaining separate Graph and SharePoint REST capabilities creating unnecessary complexity?
• What challenges have you faced when working with SharePoint List Views?
• How are you handling this limitation in production environments?

Share your experience, workarounds, and thoughts on the future of Microsoft Graph and SharePoint integration.

With AI copilots, automated dashboards, and conversational analytics becoming more common, many teams are re-evaluating traditional analytics platforms like Alteryx.

At the same time, Alteryx continues to be widely used for workflow automation, data preparation, and enterprise-scale analytics processes.

So where does it stand today?
Is it evolving alongside AI, or being replaced by newer approaches?

I’ve been working with Alteryx on moderately large datasets, and performance starts to slow down as workflows get more complex.

Looking for practical approaches others are using to:

• Reduce processing time
• Handle memory limitations
• Optimize joins and transformations

Would be helpful to understand what’s working in real-world scenarios.

I’m working on an Alteryx workflow where the input data schema changes frequently (new columns get added, some get removed, and column order varies).

This is causing issues with tools like Select, Join, and Union, where the workflow breaks if expected fields are missing or renamed.

For example, I’m reading multiple files:

Input Data → Select → Join → Output

But when a new column appears in one file or a column is missing in another, the workflow fails or produces inconsistent output.

What I’ve tried:

• Using Auto Config by Name in Union

• Dynamic Rename tool

• Select with “Unknown” fields

Still facing issues with joins and downstream tools.

My questions:

• What’s the best way to make Alteryx workflows resilient to schema changes?

• Are there recommended patterns or tools (Dynamic Input, Field Info, etc.) for handling this?

• How do you ensure joins don’t break when fields are inconsistent?

Would appreciate any best practices or real-world approaches.

I’ve recently started learning Alteryx and can build basic workflows, but when multiple conditions, null handling, and transformations come in, I’m not always confident my logic is right. The workflow runs, but I’m unsure if it’s clean or scalable. Would love guidance from seniors on how you think through workflow design and avoid messy workarounds early on.