Now the code is able to handle non consecutive LS

[dinardo]

I contacted the experts in order to understand exactly how the LS stream is handled in the DQM and they told me that it's not guaranteed that they will be consecutive. I've therefore changed the code in order to cope with non consecutive LSs.

• Mauro.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @dinardo (Mauro) for CMSSW_7_4_X.

Now the code is able to handle non consecutive LS

It involves the following packages:

DQM/BeamMonitor
DQM/Integration

@cmsbuild, @danduggan, @vanbesien, @deguio can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@threus, @batinkov this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[deguio]

this PR should contain the changes from
#11445 (pending in 76)
#11256 (merged in 76)

@dinardo please tell me if this is not the case

[deguio]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: d6555e7
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11446/8330/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-11446/8330/summary.html

[deguio]

+1
this is online only and would be nice to have in the next build

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_4_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_7_6_X is complete. This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[davidlange6]

+1