DQM Physics sequence missing input collections #22996
Comments
|
A new Issue was created by @fabiocos Fabio Cossutti. @davidlange6, @Dr15Jones, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos can you please review it and eventually sign/assign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
|
assign dqm |
|
New categories assigned: dqm @jfernan2,@vazzolini,@vanbesien,@kmaeshima,@dmitrijus you have been requested to review this Pull request/Issue and eventually sign? Thanks |
|
@jfernan2 is your revision of DQM sequences thought to address also this issue? |
|
@fabiocos it was not but I am adding it now to the list |
|
BTW: I am not sure why 'assign dqm' is retrieving an old list of DQM L2 people since cms-bot categories.py file has the right list.... |
|
presumably the dqm group hasn't kept it up to date - to do so, make a PR for
https://github.com/cms-sw/cms-bot/blob/308056b21a7832caf8adfd127bc728d7a2473b07/categories.py#L25
… On Oct 15, 2019, at 12:50 PM, jfernan2 ***@***.***> wrote:
BTW: I am not sure why 'assign dqm' is retrieving an old list of DQM L2 people since cms-bot categories.py file has the right list....
Where can I fix that? Sorry I failed to find it on github...
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
|
|
@davidlange6 as I said in my comment, the categories.py file is up to date in what dqm concerns since a long time, just search for @vazzolini,@vanbesien,@dmitrijus there, they are not there but the comment by cmsbuild triggered by "assign dqm" command took a wrong list |
|
Sorry misunderstood. Maybe we have an obsolete version of the cmsbot repo someplace in Jenkins
David
On 15 Oct 2019, at 13:26, jfernan2 <notifications@github.com> wrote:
@davidlange6<https://github.com/davidlange6> as I said in my comment, the categories.py file is up to date in what dqm concerns since a long time, just search for @vazzolini<https://github.com/vazzolini>,@vanbesien<https://github.com/vanbesien>,@dmitrijus<https://github.com/dmitrijus> there, they are not there but the comment by cmsbuild triggered by "assign dqm" command took a wrong list
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#22996?email_source=notifications&email_token=ABGPFQ3AFRFYQE57B6F2L5TQOWSEZA5CNFSM4E3H3E5KYY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEBIMXAQ#issuecomment-542165890>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABGPFQ65UHFC5PJJG5T6YIDQOWSEZANCNFSM4E3H3E5A>.
|
|
@jfernan2 @davidlange6 please note that the issue itself is quite old, open since April last year... |
|
As now @jfernan2 is going through the sequence cleaning process, I think it is a good idea to check back all the issues that were temporarily hidden during data taking by protections |
you are right... my fault then |
|
@fabiocos the point is how to check at present if the fix works, 1001.2,1040.1 workflows do not show this problem with runTheMatrix.py as far as I can tell from the logs.. |
|
@jfernan2 this goes back to the problem of defining a proper express-like test suitable for recent runs. Configuration/DataProcessing can provide a tool to help here. |
|
@fabiocos I have fixed the issue in the last commit of #28156 |
|
@jfernan2 thank you, defining a test workflow to mimic the latest express configuration is something we should consider, as discussed multiple times |
|
This issue should be closed |
|
@jfernan2 @silviodonato do we have evidence that all the issues (i.e. error messages induced by protections) have gone? And was the express workflow tested in some way? |
|
Good point @fabiocos . I tried to look for the error messages related to the protection in the IB tests of old releases without success. @jfernan2, do you know how to reproduce the old error related to |
|
@silviodonato I guess that reverting the PR i made up there, right? |
|
I looked at the IB test of CMSSW_11_0_X [1] because they should not include #28156 |
|
Sorry @silviodonato I do not understand: the link you point out is from IB of today while #28156 was merged in 11_0_X around October 2019 |
|
You are right. I wanted to say CMSSW_10_6_X. For instance, I don't see any special error in |
|
I see... @fabiocos spotted this in real Express sequence at Tier0 if I understand correctly. 136.8391 is using DQM:@standardDQM+@ExtraHLT+@miniAODDQM so the issue should be hidden there since all the JetCorrections are loaded @schneiml has been trying to get the actual config file and cmsRun environment at T0: Nevertheless, I have tested DQM/Physics/test/topDQM_production_cfg.py which is the closest test file to the TOP modules, and since the Jet correctors are loaded in the JetMET DQM module the problem should be gone now even in real express... |
|
@jfernan2 @silviodonato @qliphy not sure which kind of updates are available nowadays, some cleaning was ongoing already when I left the release manager task. Probably this issue should be closed and something newer opened in case there are residual problems are present, please provide comments and suggestions. |
|
I agree, I think we can close this issue. @jfernan2 ? |
|
Yes, fine from my side |
The DQM Physics sequence is throwing exceptions in the express configuration due to the lack of an input jet corrector collection. A quick protection has been made available in #22992 / #22993 to prevent on the very short term express crashes even if the collection is missing, but this is just a temporary workaround.
A proper solution implies fixing the DQM Physics sequence, in a similar way as the DQM JetMET sequence, so as to pass correctly the collection.
Two solution have been checked to solve the problem in the express configuration:
adding the ak4PFCHSL1FastL2L3CorrectorChain sequence at the beginning of the dqmPhysics sequence;
move the name of the collection to the clone dqmAk4PFCHSL1FastL2L3CorrectorChain, used by the DQM JetMET sequence, in the top physics modules requiring it.
A proper solution should be deplyed, making the protection in #22992 not necessary, but it should be verified to work in all possible scenarios.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: