I have a repeating group where I pull data about individual properties but there’s a section within the RG that needs to pull data about these properties that is kept in a separate table.
How can I pull this data into the RG without having to constantly do “Search for” database queries for a load of data points within each cell? Shouldn’t a Group within the RG be allowed to have it’s own Type of Content?
Each table has a matching record to join with each other.
The group within the rg is served the thing in the data source of the rg. For direct relationships within two things you will be able to look up the subordinate things. For inverse relationships you have to do searches with constraint/s to contain the inverse related thing.
Hope the above makes sense 
I don’t yet fully understand the architecture of a bubble database and how it interacts with groups and repeating groups but you’ve been very helpful in helping me gain that understanding.
I guess it would be nice if the RG data could be joined to a second table through a common field so that I could eliminate the constant searching I do at each element today and improve efficiency overall. I have an RG that half of the data comes from one table and the other half comes from another table and with a dozen or more cells each with a dozen or so elements needing data from the alternate table, I worry that there’s no efficiency as already I can watch the display slowly fill in as all the searches and calculations are performed. We need either a Join at the RG level or allow a group within an RG to have a separate data source and the elements inside this group to use Parent rather than Search at each cell.
If things are unrelated consider relating them
They are related, one table contains property data such as address, images, and such that I only need a single record for. The other table contains unit data, like how many 1 bedrooms, 2 bedrooms, what the floorplan name is, etc. that exists in a property, so there’s multiple records in this table for each property. They can be joined via the Property Name at the moment.
I already “join” them myself within the cell of the RG through the common Property Name but each field that comes from the second table is a “Search for” result from the second table. In the image below it’s the bottom box of numbers and that’s just one cell out of many that will be displayed, including weighted average calculations at the bottom that each appear to require 3 searches for just one result. That’s 19 additional searches just for one cell, in addition to each row in that bottom group also having multiple criteria (property name and unit type).
The top portion, the address, pictures, etc. comes from the first table and have no additional criteria as it comes from the RG data source so only one search per cell.
Is the property name in the unit a text field or a thing field? (… a property)
It’s text in both…
I had forgotten about setting a field to a thing…
