# Ability not to link to end state entities **URL:** \ **Category:** Ideas & Features\ **Created:** [April 21, 2022, 8:02am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/ability-not-to-link-to-end-state-entities/2729 "2022-04-21T08:02:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![4erkas](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/4erkas/32/4885_2.png) [@4erkas](https://community.fibery.io/u/4erkas)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2022, 8:02am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/ability-not-to-link-to-end-state-entities/2729/1 "2022-04-21T08:02:27Z")
Please implement the ability not to show entities which reached end state in the relations. Think about following use cases: 1. The Sprint which is completed - what is the reason to keep ability to allow linking features to it? 2. Think about Epic which is “done” - no sense to allow linking more features to it 3. Think about “Request” which was fulfilled - no sense to keep allowing linking more tasks, orders, etc to it. Ideally, should be configurable to relation: something like “Prevent linking when reached end state”. ---
**Author:** ![Chr1sG](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/chr1sg/32/3941_2.png) [@Chr1sG](https://community.fibery.io/u/Chr1sG)\ **Post date:** [April 21, 2022, 11:12am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/ability-not-to-link-to-end-state-entities/2729/2 "2022-04-21T11:12:00Z")
Seems to be an example of this: > [@\[APPROVED\] Relationships filter](https://community.fibery.io/t/approved-relationships-filter/1364): > > It would be great to be able to create a Relation column that only shows a filtered subset of the relevant Type. So for example, a relation column that only shows Tasks that are already marked “done,” or Expenses that are greater than $100. Etc. ---
**Author:** ![4erkas](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/4erkas/32/4885_2.png) [@4erkas](https://community.fibery.io/u/4erkas)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2022, 9:34am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/ability-not-to-link-to-end-state-entities/2729/3 "2022-04-25T09:34:22Z")
What will happen with existing relationship once e.g. it’s done? Relationship gone or not showing? ---
**Author:** ![Chr1sG](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/chr1sg/32/3941_2.png) [@Chr1sG](https://community.fibery.io/u/Chr1sG)\ **Post date:** [April 25, 2022, 9:37am UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/ability-not-to-link-to-end-state-entities/2729/4 "2022-04-25T09:37:42Z")
Still TBD. I suspect that in the short-term, it will only be possible to set up filters when defining new relationships between dbs, so existing relationships will not be affected. But I’m just guessing. ---
**Author:** ![Dimitri\_S](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/dimitri_s/32/1683_2.png) [@Dimitri\_S](https://community.fibery.io/u/Dimitri_S)\ **Post date:** [May 2, 2022, 9:16pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/ability-not-to-link-to-end-state-entities/2729/5 "2022-05-02T21:16:07Z")
Here’s a decent workaround, that might work for you. Using Requests as an example you have your **Request** database and then you create an **Arch Request** database for archived Requests. When a Request is complete you [convert it](https://community.fibery.io/t/changelog-april-8-convert-entities-to-another-type-zendesk-integration-schema-changes-in-audit-log/1542#convert-entities-to-another-type-1) to an Arch Request and then delete the Request, this can also be handled by an automation. Note that the Arch Request db should have all the same fields as the Request db and you will need to remember to update the Arch Request db when Request db fields are added or renamed. ---
**Author:** ![4erkas](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/4erkas/32/4885_2.png) [@4erkas](https://community.fibery.io/u/4erkas)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2022, 3:51pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/ability-not-to-link-to-end-state-entities/2729/6 "2022-05-10T15:51:13Z")
In case there is any reporting - having data in two dbs will make it much more completed. I don’t see this as a viable workaround ☹ ---
**Author:** ![Chr1sG](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/community.fibery.io/chr1sg/32/3941_2.png) [@Chr1sG](https://community.fibery.io/u/Chr1sG)\ **Post date:** [May 10, 2022, 4:05pm UTC](https://community.fibery.io/t/ability-not-to-link-to-end-state-entities/2729/7 "2022-05-10T16:05:48Z")
When constructing a report view, it is possible to report on multiple databases, so it need not be complicated. And if the databases have the same fields, then it is trivially easy to configure.