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

adding Prod2017 wfs #22393

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Mar 5, 2018
Merged

Conversation

prebello
Copy link
Contributor

This PR aims to add new Prod2017 wfs. Following #22388

FYI @fabozzi

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @prebello (Patricia Rebello Teles) for master.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/PyReleaseValidation

@GurpreetSinghChahal, @cmsbuild, @prebello, @kpedro88, @fabozzi can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @felicepantaleo, @ebrondol, @ghellwig, @Martin-Grunewald this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@prebello
Copy link
Contributor Author

please test workflow 1301.17,1302.17,1303.17

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Feb 28, 2018

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/26391/console Started: 2018/03/01 01:03

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 1, 2018

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 1, 2018

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 1, 2018

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-22393/26391/summary.html

@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:

  • /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/results/JR-comparison/PR-22393/1301.17_ProdMinBias_13UP17+ProdMinBias_13UP17+DIGIUP17PROD1+RECOPRODUP17
  • /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/results/JR-comparison/PR-22393/1302.17_ProdTTbar_13UP17+ProdTTbar_13UP17+DIGIUP17PROD1+RECOPRODUP17
  • /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/results/JR-comparison/PR-22393/1303.17_ProdQCD_Pt_3000_3500_13UP17+ProdQCD_Pt_3000_3500_13UP17+DIGIUP17PROD1+RECOPRODUP17

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 29
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2479021
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2478844
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 176
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 1.05000000005 KiB( 22 files compared)
  • Checked 118 log files, 9 edm output root files, 29 DQM output files

@@ -1635,6 +1644,8 @@ def gen2018HiMix(fragment,howMuch):
steps['RECOPROD1']=merge([{ '-s' : 'RAW2DIGI,L1Reco,RECO,RECOSIM,EI,PAT', '--datatier' : 'AODSIM,MINIAODSIM', '--eventcontent' : 'AODSIM,MINIAODSIM'},step3Defaults])
#steps['RECOPRODUP15']=merge([{ '-s':'RAW2DIGI,L1Reco,RECO,EI,DQM:DQMOfflinePOGMC','--datatier':'AODSIM,DQMIO','--eventcontent':'AODSIM,DQM'},step3Up2015Defaults])
steps['RECOPRODUP15']=merge([{ '-s':'RAW2DIGI,L1Reco,RECO,RECOSIM,EI,PAT,DQM:DQMOfflinePOGMC','--datatier':'AODSIM,MINIAODSIM,DQMIO','--eventcontent':'AODSIM,MINIAODSIM,DQM'},step3Up2015Defaults])
## for 2017 PROD
steps['RECOPRODUP17']=merge([{ '--era' :'Run2_2017','-s':'RAW2DIGI,L1Reco,RECO,RECOSIM,EI,PAT','--conditions': 'auto:phase1_2017_realistic'},steps['RECOPRODUP15']])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since you are not running DQM step, you have to remove DQM/DQMIO from eventcontent/datatier

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 3, 2018

Pull request #22393 was updated. @GurpreetSinghChahal, @cmsbuild, @prebello, @kpedro88, @fabozzi can you please check and sign again.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 3, 2018

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 3, 2018

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 3, 2018

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-22393/26475/summary.html

@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:

  • /build/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/results/JR-comparison/PR-22393/1301.17_ProdMinBias_13UP17+ProdMinBias_13UP17+DIGIUP17PROD1+RECOPRODUP17

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 29
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2479021
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2478844
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 176
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 1.00000000011 KiB( 21 files compared)
  • Checked 118 log files, 9 edm output root files, 29 DQM output files

@fabozzi
Copy link
Contributor

fabozzi commented Mar 3, 2018

+1

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

kpedro88 commented Mar 3, 2018

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 3, 2018

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 will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

Copy link
Contributor

@fabiocos fabiocos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For my information, is DQMOffline no more needed for 15 samples?

@prebello
Copy link
Contributor Author

prebello commented Mar 5, 2018

Hi @fabiocos, 3 wfs were added. Maybe I misunderstood your question wrt 15 samples.
As MC production, so not used as relvals, so DQM is not needed.

@@ -1634,7 +1643,9 @@ def gen2018HiMix(fragment,howMuch):
steps['RECODBG']=merge([{'--eventcontent':'RECODEBUG,MINIAODSIM,DQM'},steps['RECO']])
steps['RECOPROD1']=merge([{ '-s' : 'RAW2DIGI,L1Reco,RECO,RECOSIM,EI,PAT', '--datatier' : 'AODSIM,MINIAODSIM', '--eventcontent' : 'AODSIM,MINIAODSIM'},step3Defaults])
#steps['RECOPRODUP15']=merge([{ '-s':'RAW2DIGI,L1Reco,RECO,EI,DQM:DQMOfflinePOGMC','--datatier':'AODSIM,DQMIO','--eventcontent':'AODSIM,DQM'},step3Up2015Defaults])
steps['RECOPRODUP15']=merge([{ '-s':'RAW2DIGI,L1Reco,RECO,RECOSIM,EI,PAT,DQM:DQMOfflinePOGMC','--datatier':'AODSIM,MINIAODSIM,DQMIO','--eventcontent':'AODSIM,MINIAODSIM,DQM'},step3Up2015Defaults])
steps['RECOPRODUP15']=merge([{ '-s':'RAW2DIGI,L1Reco,RECO,RECOSIM,EI,PAT','--datatier':'AODSIM,MINIAODSIM','--eventcontent':'AODSIM,MINIAODSIM'},step3Up2015Defaults])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was referring to this change

Copy link
Contributor Author

@prebello prebello Mar 5, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

steps['RECOPROD1'] (Run1 case) also excluded DQM:DQMOfflinePOGMC
Prod wfs are only for testing MC production, so DQM step is not needed. @fabozzi can explain why DQM offline was included before.

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Mar 5, 2018

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit bfe12c4 into cms-sw:master Mar 5, 2018
@fabozzi
Copy link
Contributor

fabozzi commented Mar 5, 2018

@prebello @fabiocos
In 'prod' relvals we implement the same sequence as in MC production.
We just produce them as technical test for previous MC eras (run1, 2016, and now 2017).

Since in MC production we do not run any DQM sequence, we have cut
out DQM:DQMOfflinePOGMC in all 'prod' relvals (DQM:DQMOfflinePOGMC was likely a remnant of DQM sequence that was run long long time ago in MC production).

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Mar 5, 2018

@fabozzi @prebello thank you for the clarification

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

5 participants