This message was deleted.

It really depends on a lot of factors, as, for one example, you could compare a fairly “simple” app with a much larger number of records to one with a “small” number but a lot of lookups, scripting, etc. that performs worse as a result. I couldn’t really recommend one thing over another, as each has pros and cons, which can matter more or less depending on the specific context. You could try using our own Stacker Tables for your use case, as there isn’t a hard limit. However, with above 50k you may run into some issues and 100k+ would most likely not be very usable due to the load — but again, a lot of it depends on how the app is built, data in structured, and how much processing needs to be done in general. Most of our customers find that they only need a small portion of records in their apps for active usage, and either Stacker Tables, Google Sheets, or Airtable (their Enterprise plan allows up to 250,000 records) could work. So my question (in response to yours — sorry!) would be: Do you really need that many records in the app? I’d also be curious as to why. I’m not sure that any off-the-shelf low/no-code solution would handle that well, especially compared to something custom-built (since structure and performance could be optimized according to specific needs).

@straight-hairdresser-36473 There is indeed no silver bullet for this issue. Many businesses need to eventually store more than 50-100k records, and the tradeoffs depend on the business. Each case is different. The Airtable Enterprise plan is the easiest upgrade, but doesn’t always solve the issue, as there is still a limit of records per table (50k, or 100k, I believe they’ve increased it recently). You can get in touch with me if you’d like to have a more in-depth talk about potential solutions and which ones might be the best for your business.