I’m very excited about this! Unfortunately first result is “Could not load app setting. Please try again later.” I’d try to fix it but I have no idea what the actual problem is from the error message.
Update: OK so I was trying it with a fairly big production database, 25,000+ records, initially. Not sure if that’s the issue or what, but I got it to work with a brand new test database with simple test data (CRM, ~50 records). It does create new Types if you want it to (answering my crossed out question below), so that’s great. Can also link to some existing data, though I found that process a little unclear so far.
Main problem is that, in the simplest case where I just created all new Types for Airtable data, the fields that are Relationships just have a record ID instead of an actual connection to the correct other Type/Entity. Something like “recDsd41H4RZRQTpC”. And in some cases there are multi-relationship, and then you just get a string of comma separated IDs: “reciDkG5eB8SZemYH,recwv81yfeykiCLQU,recLk9CQYlFlgcX4k”
Compare to the Hubspot integration where this kind of inter-type linking seems to work fine.
Another thing is that the field types are not maintained in some cases (but are in others). Checkboxes come in, for example, but single-selects don’t. Dates and websites do as well. Mostly it’s single/multi-selects that appear not to. From looking at the Hubspot integration, this seems like generally how it is with integrations to Fibery. I’m not sure whether that’s a necessary limitation long-term nor - more importantly - whether it will cause any issues for the data being referenced/used in other places (e.g. in a calculation). But it does at least make it much less visually distinguishable vs. Airtable in the case of selects/tags.
I’m also wondering whether the sync is change-aware or otherwise incremental, or if it has to fetch all the data from the remote Base to compare against what it has and determine any changes. I would hope the Airtable API would have some kind of date-based change detection that it could use to limit the transferred data. Otherwise trying to keep 25k records in sync is not likely to be feasible, I would think.
All that said, it’s promising, and probably usable in its current form for some (perhaps many) purposes. But without the correct links between entities/types, it has some notable limitations for me. Thanks for the work so far!
Also unclear whether all fields need to already exist in Fibery and just be matched with Airtable data, or if it will actually create new fields that don’t already exist (would be nice).