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
[90X] Allow multi-IOV input for Millepede alignment framework #17724
[90X] Allow multi-IOV input for Millepede alignment framework #17724
Conversation
- move subtask into dedicated methods -> first step needed for unification -> also needed for support of multi-IOV input tag
- still enforce it in case no output IOVs are specified - adapt MPS to handle multi-IOV inputs properly
- split up input db creation in separate functions - propagate this change to stand-alone input creation script
- no functional change - just added missing configuration parameters which are deactivated for PCL
Make the method non-virtual because it acts like a constructor applied on an already constructed object. Since a constructor is always non-virtual it appears to be cleanest to declare also the 'update' methods non-virtual.
please test |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
Comparison job queued. |
same observation and content as #17475 |
+1 |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next master IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @Muzaffar, @davidlange6, @smuzaffar |
+1 |
Removes shortcoming of the alignment framework which has not been able to update the alignables after an update of the tracker geometry at an IOV boundary.
Removes also temporary fix of #16135 and enables the usage of multi-IOV input for Millepede.
Added various protection against misconfiguration.
The code has been used to derive the 2016 legacy alignment.
The general AlignmentProducer has the new features disabled by default. It is only enabled for Millepede. If other alignment algorithms want to use it a flag has to be set to
True
:The code is based on top of #17408, i.e. to better digest the changes, it might be useful to first review and eventually approve #17408.
EDIT: A dedicated presentation on this update has been given at the Tracker Alignment meeting on 01-Mar-2017
Automatically ported from CMSSW_9_0_X #17475 (original by @ghellwig).
Please wait for a new IB (12 to 24H) before requesting to test this PR.