By the way, as a temporary workaround, I created another table wherein the “key column” contained the values I wanted to be unique, and linked my second column to the original table’s key values.

The name column doesn’t have to be unique. Try it and see

Hello Hashim, thank you for your reply.

I would like the option to make the name column unique even when it is not in the key field column. Do you know of a way to enforce a policy that only allows unique values in fields that are not the key column?

Thanks in advance!

any workaround/ update on this?

No workaround from my perspective. I just live with the fact that I will have to comb thru the table. Not sure why people are not concerned about this, and why more people have not run into this issue.

It is absolutely essential for many aspects, hope someone will address this

I’d also agree that having a ‘value must be unique’ as an option on most (if not all) field types would be a valuable feature.

Even if this was only implemented on the ‘Key’ field in the first instance, then that would be a huge bonus.

If others come across this Feature Request, please add your comments or support, so that it can be prioritised accordingly.

Thanks.

Hello,

Have anyone any news on this feature?

Forcing a field to be ‘unique’ is great for safety reasons in many of our use cases.

All the best,

EverPhotoShoot

Exactly this! Unique values are a must! Otherwise duplicates can be easily added without control. I recently had a case where duplicate data was added and had to manually merge them field by field, it was really unpleasant experience.

I really hope an option for unique values on all field types will be added soon.

Forcing Unique values would be great for all of my bases. If I were the only one adding entries, I could manage this myself, but I have a lot of people collaborating on my bases.

looks like little to no development or even statement on essential features. This is annoying

Unfortunately they do not deem this as an “essential” feature.

Things in this app appear to be added to their road map based on the number of views and hits, and impact on the majority of users (as it should).

I am guessing that (because of its intuitiveness and usefulness) many users of this app dont have much clue or care about database structures or data integrity. To them this is just a flashy new to-do-list app with drop downs. And as for the other 20% or more, they just use the API to script their database needs… which leaves us SOL unless you want to put a massive amount of manpower into setting up a simple table.

In fairness to Airtable, it seems that the majority of case studies and examples are for more casual uses.

If data structure and referential integrity are of the utmost priority to your app you’d probably be better off using a ‘proper’ database anyway.

I would never dream of using Airtable for any of the projects I currently have running on PostgreSQL.

be it only for one field, but it is a must.

This is a key feature any data management systems should have. Airtable is an exceptionally simple tool however basic yet very important and fundamentally necessary options such as this should not be ignored.

I also believe that unique values (at least on the name field), required fields and data validation are basic database functions and they should be implemented in AirTable. I would also like to have a way to lock down the options available in a drop-down. Right now, Editors can add values to a drop-down. Also, a field can be defined as Phone number but you can enter anything in it; same thing if the field is defined as email. The only field types that perform any kind of data validation are date fields and number fields.

Totaly agree!!

any progress?

Best

Fabian

Love Airtable as a tool, but add me to the list of people that see this as essential requirement of a DB!

+1 we also need this!

Don’t know. It’s weird so very few people consider this important.

I’d also appreciate being able to force column uniqueness constraint—at least on a table’s (non-formula) Primary Field. It is a bit confusing that it is allowed at all, if you accidentally have 2 duplicate primary field entries, I’ve found that certain rollup/aggregation functions don’t work as expected (which is expected if you have database experience, but not for the layperson).

Can I add a +1 for the unique column?!

Yep! Example - a form where people can flag a Thing. Has the thing been flagged already? Then the form says no.

This would be great. I’m using AirTable as a low-touch high-flexibility CRM, after being frustrated with Hubspot’s poor UX, slow data entry, and difficulty to edit. Needing to manually remove duplicates may be the pain that makes me give up AirTable as a CRM

Here is a solution.

At zzBots, we integrated with AirTable to create a bot that will automatically flag any duplicate records in a table based on the field specified.

Here is a step by step video on how to create this bot using zzBots:

If you want to check it out, search the video “How to Create a Bot That Will Automatically Flag Duplicate Records in Airtable - zzBots” on YouTube.

Hope this helps!