# Common field names to key internal databases **URL:** \ **Category:** Get Help\ **Created:** [February 15, 2024, 3:32pm UTC](https://speciforum.org/t/common-field-names-to-key-internal-databases/1562 "2024-02-15T15:32:54Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 2
**Author:** ![Grant](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex029/user_avatar/speciforum.org/grant/32/4255_2.png) [@Grant](https://speciforum.org/u/Grant)\ **Post date:** [February 15, 2024, 5:44pm UTC](https://speciforum.org/t/common-field-names-to-key-internal-databases/1562/2 "2024-02-15T17:44:26Z")
Hi @reaOSGF, Thanks for reaching out! While others in the community may have more advice to offer, I did want to mention that we do not support adding additional fields to the data model. To maintain consistency between all Specify installations, we encourage all users to change the field caption for an existing field instead! Would using a field like `text1` on the Accession table as a second identifier work in your use case? In the Specify 7.9.3 update we also introduced [uniqueness rules configuration](https://speciforum.org/t/configuring-uniqueness-rules/1487) so you can have the field be unique at a given level (collection, discipline, division, etc). Depending on your workflow, you can have the other database interact with and treat `text1` (or any required fields) as a dedicated field for your purposes. I’d be interested to hear from the community as well on what advice/experience they have with interactions like the one you are looking to configure! --- _[View the full topic](https://speciforum.org/t/common-field-names-to-key-internal-databases/1562)._