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

HCALDQM: Update DigiTask for 2018 HE (10_1_X) #22724

Merged
merged 16 commits into from Apr 11, 2018

Conversation

DryRun
Copy link
Contributor

@DryRun DryRun commented Mar 23, 2018

Updates HCALDQM DigiTask for 2018 HE. A number of plots were not filled for HEP17 last year because it would have mixed QIE8 and QIE11 digis; QIE11-specific plots were created in QIE11Task. Now that HE==QIE11, I integrated the plots of interest from QIE11Task to DigiTask.

I also included one small bug fix for LaserTask: with the 2018 HE, the range for the laser signal has to be increased.

Note that I based this PR on top of #22595, which fixed the new digi size for 2018 in DigiTask, so that PR should be merged first.

@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 @DryRun (David Yu) for master.

It involves the following packages:

DQM/HcalCommon
DQM/HcalTasks
DQM/Integration

@vazzolini, @kmaeshima, @dmitrijus, @cmsbuild, @jfernan2, @vanbesien can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @deguio, @threus, @batinkov, @thomreis 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

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 5, 2018

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@DryRun
Copy link
Contributor Author

DryRun commented Apr 5, 2018

Hi @fabiocos - yes, that is correct, QIE11Task was indeed not run for offline DQM, so several plots are new additions. I think most of the memory comes from the _cLETDCTimevsADC_SubdetPM set of plots, which added 6 256x250 histograms (HB+, HB-, HE+, HE-, HO+, HO-; HF+ and HF- were already present). This fine granularity isn't necessary, so I reduced the 250 bins to 100 bins (i.e. keep the ADC granularity, but reduce the time granularity from 1 ns to 2.5 ns).

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 5, 2018

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 5, 2018

Pull request #22724 was updated. @vazzolini, @kmaeshima, @dmitrijus, @cmsbuild, @jfernan2, @vanbesien can you please check and sign again.

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

fabiocos commented Apr 5, 2018

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 5, 2018

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/27324/console Started: 2018/04/05 21:46

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 5, 2018

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 5, 2018

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 5, 2018

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-22724/27324/summary.html

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: 2498516
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 277
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 47
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2498016
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 176
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 18920.89 KiB( 23 files compared)
  • Checked 119 log files, 9 edm output root files, 29 DQM output files

@dmitrijus
Copy link
Contributor

+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 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)

@fabiocos
Copy link
Contributor

+1

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