This Product Ideas board is currently undergoing updates, but please continue to submit your ideas.
Passing multiple records into an automation by clicking on one button would enable a great deal of flexibility:
I have done this a couple times now, but it's different each time depending on what exactly you're doing.
If you give me a specific example, I can tell you how I've done it.
I believe that this feature request is to give automations access to the values in record pickers so they can be used as inputs to the automation without cluttering up the base schema with fields that are only used as temporary inputs.
@kuovonne that is a better/cleaner way to do what I was envisioning, thank you!
@Jeff_Haskin I'm using an interface to connect two tables via a junction table:
Table A -> [Junction Table 1] <- Table B
My interface features a record detail viewer of records in Table A. This feature would allow users to:
My workaround right now involves a button that Flags the viewed record in table A (while unflagging all other records on table A). The user then selects from a Table B record picker. A second button is then clicked, which triggers an automation that:
My team has preferred this workflow over some of the other "hackier" solutions we've played with. Would be open to any feedback if there's a cleaner way to do it! Thank you!
Your current method is risky if multiple people could be selecting records to make junction records at the same time. The wrong junction records could be created.Instead of using the record picker, I would use a linked record field in Table A that links to Table B to hold the value of the record that will be in the junction table. Have the automation create the junction record using the trigger record in Table A and the linked record. After the automation creates the junction record, have it clear out the direct link field. This way multiple people can create junction records at the same time. It also eliminates the need for the "Find Records" action.
@kuovonne thank you! That is a significantly cleaner way to handle this on interfaces. Was also easier to implement. I appreciate the help!