I have been working with Confluence databases and found four limitations that do not exist with standard pages. I wanted to check if others have experienced the same and whether there are any workarounds.
Are these known limitations? Is there any plan to address them, or any workaround available in the meantime?
Hello @Maria Mas These are real, and most of them trace back to databases still being a separate content type from pages, so the page based Jira integration doesn't treat them the same way. On point 2, the database's Jira work item field is built to pull Jira data into Confluence for display; it doesn't register as a page mention on the Jira side, which is why nothing shows in the issue's content or links section. On point 3, the issue "Link, Confluence page" picker only searches pages, so a database never appears in it.
On whether any of this is planned, I can't speak to Atlassian's roadmap as a community member, so your best move is to search jira.atlassian.com for these specific gaps and vote or raise them, since that's the channel that feeds prioritisation. Background on how the database Jira fields are meant to work: Database fields
Hi @Maria Mas , thanks for spelling out the issues you ran into. If you’re still exploring alternatives, I’m with Simpleasyty and we’re currently testing Simple DB for Confluence in a private beta with one of our customers.
With Simple DB, you can manage structured records through forms and embed database views directly on regular Confluence pages. That could be a good fit if you want to show the data alongside your documentation and keep using the page itself for Jira links.
If you’d like to try it, let me know and I’d be happy to arrange beta access. I’d also be curious to hear which of the four limitations is the biggest blocker for your team so we can walk through that specific workflow together.
It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
