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

Remove the process name dependence for HCAL DPG skims (80X) #18386

Merged

Conversation

kfjack
Copy link
Contributor

@kfjack kfjack commented Apr 18, 2017

The process name was hard coded in the HCAL DPG skims (JetHTJetPlusHOFilter / PhotonJetPlusHOFilter). Remove this dependence. Back port from #18384.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @kfjack (Kai-Feng Chen) for CMSSW_8_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

DPGAnalysis/Skims

@cmsbuild, @GurpreetSinghChahal, @davidlange6, @fabozzi can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@davidlange6, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here #13028

@fabozzi
Copy link
Contributor

fabozzi commented Apr 18, 2017

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 18, 2017

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/19231/console Started: 2017/04/18 23:11

@fabozzi
Copy link
Contributor

fabozzi commented Apr 18, 2017

backport of #18384

@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-18386/19231/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 16
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 1164335
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1120
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 1163097
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 118
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • Checked 63 log files, 14 edm output root files, 16 DQM output files

@fabozzi
Copy link
Contributor

fabozzi commented Apr 19, 2017

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_8_0_X IBs (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @smuzaffar

@davidlange6
Copy link
Contributor

hi @kfjack @fabozzi - no one has brought it up so I'm assuming this is not important for the rereco. Please correct me if not the case.

@kfjack
Copy link
Contributor Author

kfjack commented Apr 27, 2017

Hi @davidlange6 , there is a thread checking with the skim contacts if they really need the full re-reco data set with these two skims. Still under communication.

@davidlange6
Copy link
Contributor

is a more difficult question than I expected - will merge this as its a simple change

@davidlange6 davidlange6 merged commit d0b0b5d into cms-sw:CMSSW_8_0_X May 2, 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

4 participants