github-starred/better-auth
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth.git synced 2026-05-23 07:18:56 -05:00
Code Issues 2.5k Packages Projects Releases 112 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #5807] Map custom id field names #10355

New Issue
Open
opened 2026-04-13 06:26:07 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 9 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-13 06:26:07 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @mfrancis107 on GitHub (Nov 6, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/5807

Originally assigned to: @ping-maxwell on GitHub.

Is this suited for github?

  • Yes, this is suited for github

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

It's our best practice to use ids such as tableNameId instead of just id.

Better auth allows for renaming all fields except the id fields.

We hack around this by having duplicated drizzle schema definitions just to satisfy better auth.

Describe the solution you'd like

export const auth = betterAuth({
  baseURL: process.env.BETTER_AUTH_URL,
  user: {
    fields: {
      id: text("user_id")
    }
  }
});

If we could map id field also like this.

Describe alternatives you've considered

Right now we include a seperately defined db schema

like so:

export const baseSchema = {
  user: sqliteTable("user", {
    id: text("user_id")
      .primaryKey()
      .$defaultFn(() => `u-${ulid()}`),
    name: text("name").notNull(),
    email: text("email").notNull().unique(),
    emailVerified: integer("email_verified", { mode: "boolean" }).notNull(),
    image: text("image"),
    role: text("role").default("user"),
    banned: integer("banned", { mode: "boolean" }).default(false),
    banReason: text("ban_reason"),
    banExpires: integer("ban_expires", { mode: "timestamp" }),
    createdAt: integer("created_at", { mode: "timestamp" }).notNull(),
    updatedAt: integer("updated_at", { mode: "timestamp" }).notNull(),
  }),

that is only used for the better auth config. So essentially we have duplicate schema definitions for better auth related tables.

Additional context

No response

Originally created by @mfrancis107 on GitHub (Nov 6, 2025). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/5807 Originally assigned to: @ping-maxwell on GitHub. ### Is this suited for github? - [ ] Yes, this is suited for github ### Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. It's our best practice to use ids such as tableNameId instead of just id. Better auth allows for renaming all fields except the id fields. We hack around this by having duplicated drizzle schema definitions just to satisfy better auth. ### Describe the solution you'd like ```ts export const auth = betterAuth({ baseURL: process.env.BETTER_AUTH_URL, user: { fields: { id: text("user_id") } } }); ``` If we could map id field also like this. ### Describe alternatives you've considered Right now we include a seperately defined db schema like so: ```ts export const baseSchema = { user: sqliteTable("user", { id: text("user_id") .primaryKey() .$defaultFn(() => `u-${ulid()}`), name: text("name").notNull(), email: text("email").notNull().unique(), emailVerified: integer("email_verified", { mode: "boolean" }).notNull(), image: text("image"), role: text("role").default("user"), banned: integer("banned", { mode: "boolean" }).default(false), banReason: text("ban_reason"), banExpires: integer("ban_expires", { mode: "timestamp" }), createdAt: integer("created_at", { mode: "timestamp" }).notNull(), updatedAt: integer("updated_at", { mode: "timestamp" }).notNull(), }), ``` that is only used for the better auth config. So essentially we have duplicate schema definitions for better auth related tables. ### Additional context _No response_
GiteaMirror added the database label 2026-04-13 06:26:07 -05:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-13 06:26:09 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@better-auth-agent[bot] commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2025):

Hi there, thanks for opening this issue! Currently, Better Auth supports renaming all fields in the schema except for the id fields, so you’re having to duplicate your schema definitions as a workaround. We understand that mapping custom id field names like tableNameId would streamline your development process, and this feature request is on our radar. In the meantime, using your separate database schema with the custom id names is the recommended approach.

Would you like to share more details on how you’re using the custom ids so our team can better prioritize this feature? Tag @better-auth-agent if you would like an answer from the Agent.

Diagram • Discord • GitHub

Diagram Join Star

<!-- gh-comment-id:3498033280 --> @better-auth-agent[bot] commented on GitHub (Nov 6, 2025): Hi there, thanks for opening this issue! Currently, Better Auth supports renaming all fields in the schema except for the id fields, so you’re having to duplicate your schema definitions as a workaround. We understand that mapping custom id field names like tableNameId would streamline your development process, and this feature request is on our radar. In the meantime, using your separate database schema with the custom id names is the recommended approach. Would you like to share more details on how you’re using the custom ids so our team can better prioritize this feature? Tag @better-auth-agent if you would like an answer from the Agent. <!-- bot:webhook reply v1 --> [Diagram](https://repodiagrams.s3.eu-north-1.amazonaws.com/better-auth_ultra_detailed_interactive.html) • [Discord](https://discord.gg/better-auth) • [GitHub](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth) [![Diagram](https://img.shields.io/badge/Diagram-2b3137?style=flat-square)](https://repodiagrams.s3.eu-north-1.amazonaws.com/better-auth_ultra_detailed_interactive.html) [![Join](https://img.shields.io/badge/join-5865F2?logo=discord&logoColor=white&style=flat-square)](https://discord.gg/better-auth) [![Star](https://img.shields.io/badge/star-181717?logo=github&logoColor=white&style=flat-square)](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth)
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-13 06:26:10 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@nick-kang commented on GitHub (Nov 7, 2025):

We're also looking for this feature. Was asked here previously - https://www.answeroverflow.com/m/1359421010998198413

<!-- gh-comment-id:3500602479 --> @nick-kang commented on GitHub (Nov 7, 2025): We're also looking for this feature. Was asked here previously - https://www.answeroverflow.com/m/1359421010998198413
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-13 06:26:11 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@nick-kang commented on GitHub (Nov 7, 2025):

We were able to get custom id field names working by creating a view for each of the better-auth tables and using an alias.

Example for the user table:

CREATE VIEW user_view 
  WITH (security_barrier, check_option = 'cascaded')
  AS
    SELECT user_id as id
    , email_verified
    , name
    , email
    , image
    , role
    , banned
    , ban_reason
    , ban_expires
    , created_at
    , updated_at
    FROM user;
<!-- gh-comment-id:3501125661 --> @nick-kang commented on GitHub (Nov 7, 2025): We were able to get custom id field names working by creating a view for each of the better-auth tables and using an alias. Example for the `user` table: ```sql CREATE VIEW user_view WITH (security_barrier, check_option = 'cascaded') AS SELECT user_id as id , email_verified , name , email , image , role , banned , ban_reason , ban_expires , created_at , updated_at FROM user; ```
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-13 06:26:12 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@rovertrack commented on GitHub (Nov 7, 2025):

is it problematic with only users id or other tables too?

<!-- gh-comment-id:3502460786 --> @rovertrack commented on GitHub (Nov 7, 2025): is it problematic with only users id or other tables too?
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-13 06:26:13 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@mfrancis107 commented on GitHub (Nov 10, 2025):

We need it for all tables.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3513673635 --> @mfrancis107 commented on GitHub (Nov 10, 2025): We need it for all tables.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-13 06:26:14 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@himself65 commented on GitHub (Nov 13, 2025):

/cc @ping-maxwell

<!-- gh-comment-id:3529787223 --> @himself65 commented on GitHub (Nov 13, 2025): /cc @ping-maxwell
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-13 06:26:15 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Ridhim-RR commented on GitHub (Nov 15, 2025):

I try to implement this for user, session, and account tables but this leads to lot of changes/conflictions in the test cases.So decided to withdraw the PR.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3536419454 --> @Ridhim-RR commented on GitHub (Nov 15, 2025): I try to implement this for user, session, and account tables but this leads to lot of changes/conflictions in the test cases.So decided to withdraw the PR.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-13 06:26:15 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@insano70 commented on GitHub (Dec 19, 2025):

Tried to use better-auth for the first time on a new project and ran straight into this issue. Please don't try to inflict your database column names on others, let us pick our own.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3675412182 --> @insano70 commented on GitHub (Dec 19, 2025): Tried to use better-auth for the first time on a new project and ran straight into this issue. Please don't try to inflict your database column names on others, let us pick our own.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-13 06:26:17 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@nickhod commented on GitHub (Mar 3, 2026):

This limitation isn't clear from the docs
https://better-auth.com/docs/concepts/database#custom-table-names

Ideally the id fields would be customizeable, but if this isn't possible an error should be thrown when its attempted. Wasted several hours trying to figure this out before finding this issue.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3991328834 --> @nickhod commented on GitHub (Mar 3, 2026): This limitation isn't clear from the docs https://better-auth.com/docs/concepts/database#custom-table-names Ideally the id fields would be customizeable, but if this isn't possible an error should be thrown when its attempted. Wasted several hours trying to figure this out before finding this issue.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
adapter
astro
awaiting external contributor
blocked
breaking
breaking change
bug
c-devops
core
credentials
database
dependencies
devops
devtools
docs
documentation
duplicate
elysia
enhancement
enterprise
expo
express
fastify
good first issue
help wanted
hono
identity
infra
integration
invalid
javascript
locked
maintenance
need-more-information
needs: info
needs: repro
nextjs
nuxt
oauth
organization
P0
payments
perf
platform
plugin
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 question
ready
regression
remix
security
social-provider
solid
stale
svelte
tanstack-start
tracking
version-bump
vue
wontfix
No Label database
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
GiteaMirror ninjasurge
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/better-auth#10355
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?