memory reduction most visible for HI processing, done mostly by dropping muon isodeposits in HI

[slava77]

originally, as a follow up to cmsRun1-68 from
https://hypernews.cern.ch/HyperNews/CMS/get/recoDevelopment/1405.html

(I)
using the heavier events from the report and igprof -mp, the muon isodeposits were found to contribute up to 400 MB/event in memory (at least an order of magnitude less is expected for more normal HI events and much less for pp events).
It turns out that the isodeposits put in the event are not used anywhere in HI workflows.
So, they are dropped.
This has the largest "long-term" impact (from the time muon id module runs to the end of the event)

(II)
In addition, modules with fairly large memory churn (MEM_TOTAL) were cleaned somewhat trivially, without changing the algorithm logic.
The net effect on the large events was about 15-20% reduction in allocations in stream::EDProducer and stream::EDAnalyzer modules.
There are only short-term (less than the module ::produce time) contributions.
The optimizations here also speed up substantially the modified modules.

Overall, for the job that failed at T0: the 8-thread configuration memory peak reduced from 15.67 GiB to 14.88 GiB.

tested in CMSSW_7_5_7_patch2: no differences were observed in monitored quantities

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @slava77 (Slava Krutelyov) for CMSSW_7_5_X.

It involves the following packages:

DQM/SiPixelMonitorTrack
DQMOffline/EGamma
DQMOffline/JetMET
DQMOffline/Muon
DQMOffline/Trigger
RecoEcal/EgammaCoreTools
RecoEgamma/EgammaPhotonProducers
RecoHI/HiMuonAlgos
RecoMuon/MuonIdentification
RecoMuon/MuonIsolationProducers
RecoParticleFlow/PFProducer

@cvuosalo, @cmsbuild, @deguio, @slava77, @vanbesien, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@TaiSakuma, @abbiendi, @rappoccio, @argiro, @echapon, @lgray, @threus, @mmarionncern, @battibass, @ahinzmann, @jhgoh, @dgulhan, @jdolen, @trocino, @yetkinyilmaz, @Sam-Harper, @barvic, @bellan, @nhanvtran, @schoef, @richard-cms, @mandrenguyen, @MiheeJo, @jazzitup, @yenjie, @kurtejung, @istaslis, @mariadalfonso, @rociovilar, @bachtis this is something you requested to watch as well.
@slava77, @Degano, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

Following commands in first line of a comment are recognized

• +1|approve[d]|sign[ed]: L1/L2's to approve it
• -1|reject[ed]: L1/L2's to reject it
• assign <category>[,<category>[,...]]: L1/L2's to request signatures from other categories
• unassign <category>[,<category>[,...]]: L1/L2's to remove signatures from other categories
• hold: L1/all L2's/release manager to mark it as on hold
• unhold: L1/user who put this PR on hold
• merge: L1/release managers to merge this request
• [@cmsbuild,] please test: L1/L2 and selected users to start jenkins tests
• [@cmsbuild,] please test with cms-sw/cmsdist#<PR>: L1/L2 and selected users to start jenkins tests using externals from cmsdist

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/10269/console

[cmsbuild]

-1

Tested at: e66f643
I found errors in the following unit tests:

---> test runtestRecoEgammaPhotonIdentification had ERRORS

you can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12764/10269/summary.html

[slava77]

this unit test failure is also in the IB.
It looks like the file is no longer around /store/relval/CMSSW_7_5_2/RelValH130GGgluonfusion_13/GEN-SIM-RECO/PU25ns_75X_mcRun2_asymptotic_v5-v1/00000/26521749-9F50-E511-9B5E-00261894390E.root

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-12764/10269/summary.html

[slava77]

+1

for #12764 e66f643

• jenkins tests confirm no changes in the monitored outputs.