Relabelling with new Rec numbering Record

[bsunanda]

Access Reco Numbering to relabel

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @bsunanda for CMSSW_6_2_X_SLHC.

Relabelling with new Rec numbering Record

It involves the following packages:

SimCalorimetry/HcalSimProducers

@cmsbuild, @civanch, @Degano, @mdhildreth, @nclopezo can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
@andersonjacob, @mark-grimes you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[mark-grimes]

All tests fail with

----- Begin Fatal Exception 25-Jan-2014 17:06:51 CET-----------------------
An exception of category 'NoRecord' occurred while
   [0] Processing run: 1
   [1] Running path 'simulation_step'
   [2] Calling beginRun for module MixingModule/'mix'
Exception Message:
No "HcalRecNumberingRecord" record found in the EventSetup.
 Please add an ESSource or ESProducer that delivers such a record.
----- End Fatal Exception -------------------------------------------------

Tests 40001, 50001, 50002, 60001 and 60002 fail in step 1.
Tests 3300, 3400, 4100, 4400, 4500, 4502, 5001 and 15001 fail in step 2.
Building on top of CMSSW_6_2_X_SLHC head, so including your earlier pull requests #2163 and #2164.

[bsunanda]

Hi

Could you point me the configuration files? I need to know the geometry cff file they refer to. I have not seen all the files in the repository. Sorry for that. Cheers

Sunanda

Sent from Samsung Mobile

mark-grimes notifications@github.com wrote:

All tests fail with

----- Begin Fatal Exception 25-Jan-2014 17:06:51 CET-----------------------
An exception of category 'NoRecord' occurred while
[0] Processing run: 1
[1] Running path 'simulation_step'
[2] Calling beginRun for module MixingModule/'mix'
Exception Message:
No "HcalRecNumberingRecord" record found in the EventSetup.
Please add an ESSource or ESProducer that delivers such a record.
----- End Fatal Exception -------------------------------------------------

Tests 40001, 50001, 50002, 60001 and 60002 fail in step 1.
Tests 3300, 3400, 4100, 4400, 4500, 4502, 5001 and 15001 fail in step 2.
Building on top of CMSSW_6_2_X_SLHC head, so including your earlier pull requests #2163#2163 and #2164#2164.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/2165#issuecomment-33293131.

[mark-grimes]

I'm not sure what you mean. I run the tests with "-w upgrade" for runTheMatrix.py, which makes it pick workflows from Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_upgrade.py. These workflows are described in Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_steps.py but it's probably easier to bypass that and look at the comments to see which geometry is for which test. These are described in SLHCUpgradeSimulations/Configuration/python/*.py, the customise() function will (usually by calling a subfunction) eventually pull in a geometry file from SLHCUpgradeSimulations/Geometry/python.

So it depends on the particular test, they're designed to test every geometry. Although this currently isn't quite the case.

[bsunanda]

Could you take the pull request for bsunanda:Phase2-HE12
Hope it works. Please let me know the outcome. Cheers

Sunanda

---

From: mark-grimes [notifications@github.com]
Sent: 26 January 2014 02:30
To: cms-sw/cmssw
Cc: Sunanda Banerjee
Subject: Re: [cmssw] Relabelling with new Rec numbering Record (#2165)

I'm not sure what you mean. I run the tests with "-w upgrade" for runTheMatrix.py, which makes it pick workflows from Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_upgrade.py. These workflows are described in Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/python/relval_steps.py but it's probably easier to bypass that and look at the comments to see which geometry is for which test. These are described in SLHCUpgradeSimulations/Configuration/python/*.py, the customise() function will (usually by calling a subfunction) eventually pull in a geometry file from SLHCUpgradeSimulations/Geometry/python.

So it depends on the particular test, they're designed to test every geometry. Although this currently isn't quite the case.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//pull/2165#issuecomment-33306266.

[ianna]

@mark-grimes - please, close this PR

[mark-grimes]

I don't actually have the rights to close pull requests. There was concern that @andersonjacob and I might mess something up during the handover. @gtk set it up so that (currently) the only administrative privileges we have is to reply with "merge" in the first line and the cmsbuild bot will perform the merge.

[ktf]

I think you should be able to close them by saying "close". Can you please try?

[mark-grimes]

close

Oops, I meant to reference ktf not gtk.

[ktf]

Mmm… actually no, there is a gotcha… It needs some development. For the moment simply tell either @ktf, @Degano or @nclopezo (depending on who you want to annoy;) ) to close the pull request.