Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve early delete configuration in ConfigBuilder #16779

Merged
merged 4 commits into from Dec 7, 2016

Conversation

makortel
Copy link
Contributor

This PR is a follow-up of #16635 addressing the comments about early delete configuration in ConfigBuilder. In addition, I extended the _hasInputTagModuleLabel() function to check also possible refToPSet_'s, and added a unit test for the function.

Tested in CMSSW_9_0_X_2016-11-24-2300 by diffing edmConfigDumps of RECO step of limited matrix (also that the limited matrix runs).

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor Author

@slava77 @davidlange6 Something along this?

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cmsbuild, please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @makortel (Matti Kortelainen) for CMSSW_9_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/Applications
Configuration/StandardSequences
RecoTracker/Configuration

@cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @franzoni, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @mschrode, @gpetruc, @dgulhan this is something you requested to watch as well.
@slava77, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here #13028

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 28, 2016

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/16634/console

self.pythonCfgCode += "# End adding early deletion\n"
self.pythonCfgCode += "\n# Add early deletion of temporary data products to reduce peak memory need\n"
self.pythonCfgCode += "from Configuration.StandardSequences.earlyDeleteSettings_cff import customiseEarlyDeleteForRECO\n"
self.pythonCfgCode += "process = customiseEarlyDeleteForRECO(process)\n"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

since "if RECO" is removed, it's worth changing this to "customiseEarlyDelete" without "ForRECO"

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good point. I thought it at some point but (apparently) forgot.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-16779/16634/summary.html

The workflows 1003.0, 1001.0, 1000.0, 140.53, 136.731, 4.22 have different files in step1_dasquery.log than the ones found in the baseline. You may want to check and retrigger the tests if necessary. You can check it in the "files" directory in the results of the comparisons

As the customize is now applied for all steps.
@makortel
Copy link
Contributor Author

How about now?

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #16779 was updated. @cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @franzoni, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Nov 29, 2016

@cmsbuild please test

@makortel thanks, it looks good.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Nov 29, 2016

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/16657/console

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-16779/16657/summary.html

The workflows 1003.0, 1001.0, 1000.0, 140.53, 136.731, 4.22 have different files in step1_dasquery.log than the ones found in the baseline. You may want to check and retrigger the tests if necessary. You can check it in the "files" directory in the results of the comparisons

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Dec 5, 2016

+1

for #16779 8808614

  • code changes are in line with expected updates left over from New seeding framework #16635
  • jenkins tests pass and comparisons with baseline show no differences
  • local tests checking expanded configs show changes related to the canDeleteEarly feature: the workflows that had it already enabled in New seeding framework #16635 (with RECO step) did not change (ignoring reshuffling of entries in canDeleteEarly vstring); workflows with seeding modules that didn't have the canDeleteEarly but have the seeding modules in place (ALCA) now have canDeleteEarly defined.

@davidlange6 davidlange6 merged commit b5bcc18 into cms-sw:CMSSW_9_0_X Dec 7, 2016
@makortel makortel deleted the configBuilderEarlyDelete branch February 12, 2018 12:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants