Link to other base


#286

Not publicly - I’m participating in their beta program and there is nothing available regarding base linking right now.


#287

+1 It’s about time! This feature would be a game changer for our company and pretty much everyone including all the other folks who have commented here. This is a definitely a strong differentiator, and a great way to convince stakeholders to be onboard with Airtable. Please add this feature!


#288

Yes please! I really love airtable and want to use it for project management at my company, but I would need a way to control which tables are visible to which users and still keep all of those tables linked. This seems like the most logical way to handle that.


#289

I think the biggest reason AT is not launching something like this - is due to the sheer VOLUME of data that will hit their system. As Jeremy_Oglesby said, it’s not even in beta testing…

They only did Series B. which allowed them to launch “BLOCKS”.

Logic dictates to me that if they haven’t done it by now it’s probably going to be a Series C thing :slight_smile:


#290

Yes, this would be great. I recently had to aggreegate two different bases into one. It was a lot of work, but the Pro plan block “CSV Import”, which is outstanding, helped a lot.


#291

Definitely plus 1.
The ability to manage access in a MUCH more granular way (enable editing of records by outsiders, while managing information access), plus better reporting , wld be a game changer…


#295

+10000
Easy linking between data is Airtable Core. I use Google Spreadsheets and have a LOT of “bases”. I was considering using airtable, but without this, is unnusable for our company. All areas of a company are linked in real life. Great tool, tought.


#296

I too support this… just adding my 2 cents


#302

The possibility to link to other bases would definitely be a big fat plus ! :+1:

More than two years since the last answer from @Katherine_Duh or any @Airtable_Team member, are you at least still paying attention to your community ?


#304

+1 for this functionality.

Any solution where you require a layered approach to what the user can see (interface) or interact with (data) would really benefit from this (or from having more layered permissions within a single base).

Let’s say I’ve got different business units using the one system. Sales Agents should be able to add in and link certain pieces of information (say leads, phonecalls, sales, etc). But I don’t want them able edit the “Commissions” table (although they need to be able to see it on a dashboard view for example).

Having an “Accounts” Base which was able to interact with the “Sales” Base would be fantastic.

Personal views don’t address this functionality (at least not that I’m aware).

And if we could have multiple bases interacting, it would allow for a better stock interface (not crowding the user with table tabs that are not relevant to them, and confuse their brain).

Cheers!


#305

Adding to the chorus here. Concerned that the first request is 3 years (!!!) ago. This is a fairly basic feature request.


#306

+1. It would be far easier to organize things with this feature.


#307

I offer a few suggestions:

  • Make it a plus/pro feature. It’s incredibly valuable but not necessary for the free version

  • Explore which options are easier between:

    1. Allowing all bases in a workspace to speak to each other (by default), which means any table can be linked to any other table without setting up or changing anything. The transition will affect all current users of Airtable (they may have to fix conflicting information across bases), but once transitioned there will be no more issues.
    2. Another option is to enable multiple bases to be linked together manually, at which point the user is prompted to change any duplicate table names or potentially conflicting information. These linked bases could be grouped together visually and cycled between when within one of them. They could also share usage limits if that’s an issue (in which case it could be a free feature unable to be abused).

Both options have functional advantages and disadvantages for the users. Nevertheless they are both sufficient to meet the needs of avid Airtable users and open up incredible opportunities down the road.

Thanks @Airtable


#312

Another Plus 1 for this feature.

Literally the only thing holding us back - needs to be on the roadmap


#315

It’s embarrassing telling my clients that Airtable doesn’t support this.


#316

This is the only thing keeping me from using Airtable.


#317

+1 for this feature too. Only way to work with our virtual assistant.


#318

+1 - this is really the only way to get a more complete picture of what is happening in any business, as far as I’m concerned the whole point of a database is to be able to automate relationships between, for instance, inventory and order flow. Make it optional, maybe turned off by default if you’re concerned about overwhelming casual users - but please don’t ignore your most requested feature. This is a must for serious integration into our company. Separate departments are useless if they can’t communicate.


#319

+1 This keeps me from being able to use it for more complex inventory in our company.


#320

Another Plus +1 for this feature.