Circular reference

[Voltaic_Enginee]

I have encountered an contradictory issue wherein two schemas which are topologically identical are treated differently; one works fine and the other throws a circular reference error.

I have distilled the issue into a very simple example base. Here’s a link:

Airtable

Airtable: Organize anything you can imagine

Airtable works like a spreadsheet but gives you the power of a database to organize anything. Sign up for free.

Table 1 contains a record which is linked to another record contained in Table 2. The record’s name is a function of a value looked up in the linked record.

Everything is copacetic.

However, if I attempt to synthesize the records into a single table, AirTable gets hung up on a circular reference.

My questions are:

1. Why are these two schemas fundamentally different from each other?

2. What are my options for getting around this circular reference? I want to keep both records in the same table, and I need the name to be a function of the lookup field.

Thanks in advance!

[Voltaic_Enginee]

Bumping this issue as it seems to be an inconsistency in the product design and should be addressed one way or another.

Here’s a look at the schema for the two scenarios.

Using two tables, the schema does not cause a circular reference

However, I cannot achieve the same thing when the two tables are joined.

The red link is the one I wish to establish, but which caused a circular reference that does not make sense to me.

Is there a fundamental reason that Tables 1 & 2 are fine, but Table 3 (as I wish it to be) is not?