Water Distribution Data Management - Domain List Edit

[HMarcks]

Hello,

Hope everyone had a good New Year.

I have the Water Distribution Data Management solution 3.0 which I use in ArcGIS Online and through ArcGIS Pro.  In the past I have been able to edit the Domain Lists in AGOL but recently that option is no longer available.  I have tried going through the json to do it as well and was not successful.  I am trying to do things like add additional diameters for fittings, or a new asset type for a fitting etc.  I have checked different layers and different fields within those layers and the option is not available for anything, even the ones I changed previously like Water Main: Owned By.

The only thing I can think that has changed is that I downloaded the Backflow Inspections and Utility Service Interruptions solutions (but have not started using them yet) to check out how they worked.  Could some relationships be causing me not to be able to edit the domains?

Any insight or a fix to this without me having to download another solution, reload my data and re-do all my previous schema changes would be greatly appreciated.

[HMarcks]

Apparently I cannot add any new fields any longer either.  I just tried to add a field for degree of angle in the Fittings layer, I thought it would be a good chance to see if it would let me create a list on a new field that I needed anyway.  But the option to add a field is  not available either.😕

[JoelSmith3 · Accepted solution]

The Backflow Inspections solution will create a join view to show the last inspected backflow prevention device. Join views will lock the schema. Try deleting the solution, make the edits to the domain and then deploy the solution again. 

I hope this helps! 

Thanks,
Joel

[HMarcks]

Thank you, that was it and it fixed it right away.  Guess I'll have to keep this in mind for when/if we do decide to implement the backflow inspection.  I am a little curious as to why the Water Utility Hydrant Inspection solution didn't lock the schema as I would have expected it would create similar join views.