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

GTupdates_for_910pre3_L1O2OTags_HCAL2018Geo_PCL_TkAl_AlignableThresholds #18269

Conversation

arunhep
Copy link
Contributor

@arunhep arunhep commented Apr 7, 2017

Summary of changes in Global Tags

RunI data

RunII data

Upgrade

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 7, 2017

A new Pull Request was created by @arunhep (Arun Kumar) for master.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/AlCa

@ghellwig, @arunhep, @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.
@Muzaffar, @davidlange6, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here #13028

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Apr 7, 2017

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 7, 2017

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/19015/console Started: 2017/04/07 18:47

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Apr 7, 2017

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Apr 7, 2017

@arunhep @franzoni this will not work.

I am expecting failure of wf 1001.0, due to a duplication of ESSource for the AlignPCLThresholdsRcd record.
You'll need first to remove (as I explicitly mentioned in private message and as well here ) the additional ESSource I added in two files in order for the tests to pass:

  • Alignment/CommonAlignmentProducer/python/ALCARECOPromptCalibProdSiPixelAli_cff.py
  • Alignment/CommonAlignmentProducer/python/AlcaSiPixelAliHarvester_cff.py

You are welcome to cherry-pick this commit : mmusich@d87f994

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 7, 2017

Pull request #18269 was updated. @ghellwig, @arunhep, @cerminar, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @mmusich, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Apr 7, 2017

@cmsbuild please abort

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Apr 7, 2017

@arunhep thanks!

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Apr 7, 2017

@cmsbuild please abort

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 7, 2017

-1

Tested at: ead3bfe

You can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-18269/19015/summary.html

I found follow errors while testing this PR

Failed tests: RelVals AddOn

  • RelVals:

When I ran the RelVals I found an error in the following worklfows:
4.22 step2

runTheMatrix-results/4.22_RunCosmics2011A+RunCosmics2011A+RECOCOSD+ALCACOSD+SKIMCOSD+HARVESTDC/step2_RunCosmics2011A+RunCosmics2011A+RECOCOSD+ALCACOSD+SKIMCOSD+HARVESTDC.log

140.53 step2
runTheMatrix-results/140.53_RunHI2011+RunHI2011+RECOHID11+HARVESTDHI/step2_RunHI2011+RunHI2011+RECOHID11+HARVESTDHI.log

4.53 step3
runTheMatrix-results/4.53_RunPhoton2012B+RunPhoton2012B+HLTD+RECODR1reHLT+HARVESTDR1reHLT/step3_RunPhoton2012B+RunPhoton2012B+HLTD+RECODR1reHLT+HARVESTDR1reHLT.log

1000.0 step2
runTheMatrix-results/1000.0_RunMinBias2011A+RunMinBias2011A+TIER0+SKIMD+HARVESTDfst2+ALCASPLIT/step2_RunMinBias2011A+RunMinBias2011A+TIER0+SKIMD+HARVESTDfst2+ALCASPLIT.log

1001.0 step2
runTheMatrix-results/1001.0_RunMinBias2011A+RunMinBias2011A+TIER0EXP+ALCAEXP+ALCAHARVD1+ALCAHARVD2+ALCAHARVD3+ALCAHARVD4+ALCAHARVD5/step2_RunMinBias2011A+RunMinBias2011A+TIER0EXP+ALCAEXP+ALCAHARVD1+ALCAHARVD2+ALCAHARVD3+ALCAHARVD4+ALCAHARVD5.log

136.731 step3
runTheMatrix-results/136.731_RunSinglePh2016B+RunSinglePh2016B+HLTDR2_2016+RECODR2_2016reHLT_skimSinglePh_HIPM+HARVESTDR2/step3_RunSinglePh2016B+RunSinglePh2016B+HLTDR2_2016+RECODR2_2016reHLT_skimSinglePh_HIPM+HARVESTDR2.log

  • AddOn:

I found errors in the following addon tests:

cmsDriver.py RelVal -s L1REPACK:GCTGT --data --scenario=pp -n 10 --conditions auto:run2_hlt_Fake1 --relval 9000,50 --datatier "RAW" --eventcontent RAW --customise=HLTrigger/Configuration/CustomConfigs.L1T --era Run2_25ns --fileout file:RelVal_Raw_Fake1_DATA.root --filein /store/data/Run2015D/MuonEG/RAW/v1/000/256/677/00000/80950A90-745D-E511-92FD-02163E011C5D.root : FAILED - time: date Fri Apr 7 20:04:31 2017-date Fri Apr 7 20:01:33 2017 s - exit: 16640

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 7, 2017

Comparison not run due to runTheMatrix errors (RelVals and Igprof tests were also skipped)

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Apr 7, 2017

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 7, 2017

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/19017/console Started: 2017/04/07 22:42

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 7, 2017

-1

Tested at: fe5238d

You can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-18269/19017/summary.html

I found follow errors while testing this PR

Failed tests: AddOn

  • AddOn:

I found errors in the following addon tests:

cmsDriver.py RelVal -s L1REPACK:GCTGT --data --scenario=pp -n 10 --conditions auto:run2_hlt_Fake1 --relval 9000,50 --datatier "RAW" --eventcontent RAW --customise=HLTrigger/Configuration/CustomConfigs.L1T --era Run2_25ns --fileout file:RelVal_Raw_Fake1_DATA.root --filein /store/data/Run2015D/MuonEG/RAW/v1/000/256/677/00000/80950A90-745D-E511-92FD-02163E011C5D.root : FAILED - time: date Sat Apr 8 00:09:12 2017-date Sat Apr 8 00:05:43 2017 s - exit: 16640

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 7, 2017

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #18269 was updated. @ghellwig, @arunhep, @cerminar, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @mmusich, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Apr 10, 2017

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 10, 2017

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/19052/console Started: 2017/04/10 16:35

@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-18269/19052/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • You potentially added 45 lines to the logs
  • Reco comparison results: 3458 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 23
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 1917243
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 9558
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 6
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 1907506
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 173
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • Checked 94 log files, 14 edm output root files, 23 DQM output files

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Apr 10, 2017

@mmusich @dimattia @ianna @bsunanda
can you please share your thoughts to the comment by @franzoni #18269 (comment)
we want to report it tomorrow in orp.

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Apr 11, 2017

@arunhep
in relation to your enquiry in comments #18269 (comment) and #18269 (comment) (i.e. the tiny change in the SiStrip DIGIs spectra)
from quick look to the DQM code, those histograms shall be filled here.

The configuration of the SiStripMonitorDigi module is defined here, where I don't see any explicit dependence on Pixel conditions; @fioriNTU to confirm.
Incidentally the module level plots should be switched-off by default in this view, so this is the lowest hierarchy level histogram for DIGIs.

Also the DIGI collection validation plots, seem to point to a genuine change in the Strip DIGIs.

Now, at contrast with the description you provided, for the PhaseI 2017 realistic scenario Global Tag there is at least one change involving the digitization step (namely via SiPixelLorentzAngleSimRcd that is consumed in the pixel digitizer) see GT diff. I am wondering if we might be witnessing irreproducibilities inherent from random number generation processes stemming from different conditions input. I am adding @boudoul as ad-interim Strip simulation contact.

@franzoni
Copy link

Thanks @mmusich,
we navigated the code yesterday and reached the same conclusions on SiStripMonitorDigi.cc .

from random number generation processes stemming from different conditions input

How far would the irreproducibility triggered by a change in digi conditions propagate (I have a limited understanding of the pseudo-random number generation ) ? Your hypothesis is supported by small perturbations to the ECAL digi occupancy , though no analogous changes are found in the HcalDigiTask.

@abdoulline
Copy link

From HCAL side with the update of the HCALParameters_Geometry_91YV3 tag
we just expect to fix the crashes in L1 emulator for 2018 workflows, as Yana has correctly described
https://hypernews.cern.ch/HyperNews/CMS/get/calibrations/2859/1/1.html

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Apr 11, 2017

we navigated the code yesterday and reached the same conclusions on SiStripMonitorDigi.cc .

Nice!

How far would the irreproducibility triggered by a change in digi conditions propagate (I have a limited understanding of the pseudo-random number generation ) ?

Not being a digitization expert I cannot judge and defer to those more savvy than I am in this respect.
I can claim - though - that re-running exactly the same setup for wf 10024 but reverting the change in SiPixelLorentzAngleSimRcd in step3 via:

process.GlobalTag = GlobalTag(process.GlobalTag, '91X_upgrade2017_realistic_v3', '')
process.GlobalTag.toGet.extend(
    cms.VPSet(cms.PSet(connect= cms.string("frontier://FrontierProd/CMS_CONDITIONS"),
                       record = cms.string("SiPixelLorentzAngleSimRcd"),
                       tag = cms.string("SiPixelLorentzAngleSim_phase1_mc_v1")
                       )
              )
    )

I am able to restore a bitwise identity with the previous spectra.

comparesistripdigis

@franzoni
Copy link

hello @mmusich
thanks, we have josbs running exactly what test, running with 91X_upgrade2017_realistic_v3_PIXEL_RECO_UP_ONLY.

We've also found that the DIGI step of the workflow has a single instance of the RandomNumberGeneratorService , which supports your original conjecture.


> runTheMatrix.py -l 10024 --command=' --dump_python '
> grep  RandomNumberGeneratorService TTbar_13TeV_TuneCUETP8M1_cfi_GEN_SIM.py
process.RandomNumberGeneratorService = cms.Service("RandomNumberGeneratorService",

Thanks for the help, this PR is good to go for AlCa.

@franzoni
Copy link

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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

@davidlange6
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit e820ed5 into cms-sw:master Apr 11, 2017
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

9 participants