[81X] update phase-I geometry in all autoCond keys

[mmusich]

Summary of changes in Global Tags

Upgrade

• PhaseI realistic scenario : 81X_upgrade2017_realistic_v13 as 81X_upgrade2017_design_v12 with the following changes:
  • updated version of geometry tags (81YV7) for phase-I; see AlCa HN
• PhaseI design scenario : 81X_upgrade2017_design_v11 as 81X_upgrade2017_design_v10 with the following changes:
  • updated version of geometry tags (81YV7) for phase-I; see AlCa HN
• PhaseI HcalDev scenario : 81X_upgrade2017_HCALdev_v2 as 81X_upgrade2017_HCALdev_v1 with the following changes:
  • updated version of geometry tags (81YV8) for phase-I; see AlCa HN

[mmusich]

@ianna @kpedro88

[mmusich]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/15294/console

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for CMSSW_8_1_X.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/AlCa

@ghellwig, @cerminar, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @mmusich, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @Martin-Grunewald, @ghellwig, @tocheng this is something you requested to watch as well.
@slava77, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are list here #13028

[kpedro88]

@ianna should the new geometry tag for HCAL 2017dev be accessed just with DB:Extended, or is there a different label to use?

[mmusich]

@kpedro88. It should be accessed via DB:Extended

[ianna]

@kpedro88 - confirm, it is a default geometry in this GT queue (e.g. DB:Extended)

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 541dd97
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-15924/15294/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-15924/15294/summary.html

[mmusich]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_8_1_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @slava77, @davidlange6, @smuzaffar

[mmusich]

@ianna what exactly are we expecting to be changed between the two versions of the geometry?
Changes in phaseI simulation are all over the place. Are pixel changed as well?

[mmusich]

I am talking about for example:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/baseLineComparisons/CMSSW_8_1_X_2016-09-19-2300+15924/15982/validateJR/all_OldVSNew_TTbar13TeV2017wf10024p0/

[slava77]

On 9/21/16 12:52 AM, Marco Musich wrote:

I am talking about for example:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/baseLineComparisons/CMSSW_8_1_X_2016-09-19-2300+15924/15982/validateJR/all_OldVSNew_TTbar13TeV2017wf10024p0/

wouldn't a sequence of random numbers change eventually if more or less
any part of the geometry changes?
And once it changes, all observables will lose correlation between a
baseline and a changed geometry.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#15924 (comment), or
mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEdcbqdF4haPp_weS8IDKRjNVLXY9vyiks5qsOIlgaJpZM4KB9_c.

[mmusich]

@slava77 that's what I suspected, thanks.
Then, what is the correct procedure to limit the changes to physical ones? Something to get empirical answer to #15889 (comment)

[slava77]

On 9/21/16 5:34 AM, Marco Musich wrote:

@slava77 https://github.com/slava77 that's what I suspected, thanks.
Then, what is the correct procedure to limit the changes to physical
ones? Something to get empirical answer to #15889 (comment)
#15889 (comment)

For the actual diffs in geometry, I'd be curious to know as well.
Especially if there is a tool to visualize this in some way.
(not sure if payload dumps can help)

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#15924 (comment), or
mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEdcbtCEUJeSMIXmU-fbw4Emvp1CS9e7ks5qsSRFgaJpZM4KB9_c.

[ianna]

@mmusich - no, it's only Hcal. Pixel changes should come on top of these, so the differences better be understood.

@kpedro88 - FYI

[ianna]

@slava77 - comparison results from running with this PR should be identical to the ones you've observed in #15889 (if there are no additional differences between eras)

I can produce some comparison plots with validation script: xml vs db

[slava77]

@ianna
Changes in comparisons should be different from what is in #15889
due to additional changes in reco settings applied only in #15889

as an example, caloJets here:

and caloJets in #15889

If all changes from this PR are related to HCAL DB geometry and related payloads setup, then it seems more reasonable to combine it with #15889 in one PR.

[kpedro88]

@slava77 The HCAL geometry changes should only be in 81VY8, which is only used in the HCALdev GTs. Those GTs are only used in #15889, so the changes could not show up in a comparison here.

[davidlange6]

+1