TXT, PDF, DOC, ALS, etc. This would actually be a huge feature. ... View more

When I selecting linked records in a field, the search function only allows me to search based on the primary field. However, my primary field names are not informative (AB001, e.g.). What I really need is to search by one of the other fields of the linked record. This should be possible. When there are so many linked records to search, you have to be able to do better searches. Google Tables allows this and so does Ninox, so I know it’s possible. Do we have a formal feature request queue for Airtable to send directly to the developers? ... View more

Hunting for Fields is my #1 time waster in Airtable. I spend lots of time scrolling horizontally through column headings, or vertically through the Fields Pane. I have 5x more fields than I do Views in most Tables and I interact with them (i.e. need to find them) more often too. Why not add the “Sections” functionality for Fields, like the one that Views have? ... View more

When I open the search bar, it covers up my column titles, which makes filling information in the rightmost columns difficult. It would be nice if the search bar opened here: ... View more

The UI search bar currently requires an exact match for records to appear in search results, which can be limiting, especially when searching for specific details like the last few digits of a serial number or microchip number. The Base table’s search bar offers a more advanced matching feature, allowing users to find records based on partial entries. To improve usability and efficiency, I suggest updating the UI search bar to offer similar functionality as the Base table search. This would eliminate the need to rely on the 'Filter' option for partial searches and better support workflows that depend on quickly finding specific data. Your urgent attention to this matter is appreciated. ... View more

What is the proposed idea/solution? Right now when you search for a linked record, only exact results are returned. This means if I have a record titled "Texas State Fair - 2024 - Food", I cannot quickly grab that record by searching "Texas 2024" or "2024 food" because it's not exactly titled that way. I would have to type it all out, including hyphens, and if I had a lot of "Texas State Fair - 2024 - ###" records I'm going to have to look through them all every single time. How does is solve the user problems? Allowing a more relaxed search, semi-fuzzy of sorts, allows faster searching using the details a user remembers. It's very common to have the primary field of a table be a CONCAT formula to gather multiple pieces of data from a record (especially since you can only search for a linked record using that primary field and nothing else). By allowing less precise searches you can make it easier to find results, and there's nothing stopping a user from still being as exact as possible to further narrow down the results if they want. By loosing the tight restrictions, both types of search can still take place, but in the current design you can only use exact. How was this validated? Heavy use of linked records across multiple bases, and no ability to quickly search through thousands of records effectively to find the one I want unless I know its exact name in the primary field. Who is the target audience? Any Airtable user who has a base with linked records, especially if the base is large. ... View more

This thread inspired me to make this product suggestion, which is a standard feature of most database systems: Currently, lookup fields can only lookup information from one DIRECTLY-CONNECTED TABLE. But often times, we want to lookup information from a table that is “multiple tables away”. Even if all those multiple tables are linked to each other via a specific “path“, the field that we want to lookup still has to be continually looked up through every single table along the path. In other words, we have to keep recreating the same lookup field over & over again for each table along the “path” until we get to the current table — in order to “pull the information” through multiple tables. However, if all the tables are already linked to each other, we should simply be able to specify the “path” from our current table to the other table, and then we could instantly lookup a field from that other table to our current table, even if that other table is multiple tables away. In other words, we should be able to instantly lookup a field from “multiple tables away”, instead of only being able to pull in data from the one directly-connected table. If this sounds confusing, I would take a look at how FileMaker Pro accomplishes this. They make the concept very easy & very simple to understand. ... View more

It would great to have a way to search and jump to a header. Command + F only allows searching through the records. It would be great if there could be a Command + Shift + F to search the headers of the table and jump to it. This is especially a pain point when there are 300+ fields. Thanks ... View more

Ability to search for the Automation run history for matching data points in order to narrow down the result set, which can be helpful when troubleshooting errors. ... View more