Option to Star Bases Not Showing Up

[Nnenna_Anwara]

Hello All,

I have two base design options that I and coworkers are trying to agree on. I will like to make a comparison between the two

Base Design #1 Idea: Have one big base with all the data and third-party automations, then create views for different teams with specific permissions. If someone wants to collaborate, special permissions can be made and then deactivated after a set time. 

Base Design #2 Idea: Have different bases for different teams. This is not currently working, but there is a fear that having one big base will not suffice for everyone's needs. 

Can anyone provide pros or cons for both options?

[Kamille_Parks]

---

Base Design #1 Idea: Have one big base with all the data and third-party automations, then create views for different teams with specific permissions. If someone wants to collaborate, special permissions can be made and then deactivated after a set time. 

• Simple, easier to manage
• You can create access-controlled views using Interfaces
• Data concentrated into one base will hit record/automation limits faster
• If not looking at an interface, having several Tables/Views/Fields pertinent to only certain teams may feel visually cluttered

Base Design #2 Idea: Have different bases for different teams. This is not currently working, but there is a fear that having one big base will not suffice for everyone's needs. 

• Synced fields cannot be edited in the "destination" table, and must be edited back in the original table. 
• Finer control over permissions, as you can simply import/sync the necessary data for each team and nothing else
• Dispersed data across bases means lower risk of hitting record limits

[IliyanSlavov]

@Kamille_Parks presented the differences perfectly! Follow what she's laid out and you'll decide easily.