I am really struggling to get my head around the lack of relationship definition within a database schema in SmartSuite and I want to get past it, but I continue to be frustrated by its omission.
In a traditional database design project you map out tables and specify relationships between parent and child tables (simplified). Once defined, all data in either table is available via a defined relationship. You define it ONCE and the data is linked, all records. In a classic structure you may have an Orders table and a (child) LineItems table. The linked field between the two could be OrderNum which appears in both tables. If I wanted (and I wouldn't for data normalization reasons) to display the customer ID in the LineItems table, I could find it immediately in the Orders table by using the value in the shared field OrderNum. In SmartSuite, I have to define the linked record by adding that field and then, for every record, I have to manually enter the field and select from a list of every record in the linked "app". This seems counter-productive. I understand I can make an "automation" to do this for me where I specify that I want to link records that match a condition but even this strikes me as cumbersome as it relies on a "trigger" whereas the data should be structured such that it is always available through defined relationships rather than populated as a result of some "trigger". More elegantly, the relationship defines data that is explicitly available and not through an external "copying" or "linking" process that has to "run". The data is just available.
I am not striving to be difficult nor looking to debate the merits of this solution vs traditional database tools. I really want to use SmartSuite, but have this mental block that perhaps one of you who has overcome this can help me move beyond and explain how to manage all the "automations" that will have to be built and triggered to keep the whole solution connected.