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
reMiniAOD relval workflows for heavy ions #30354
Conversation
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-30354/16376
|
A new Pull Request was created by @mandrenguyen (Matthew Nguyen) for master. It involves the following packages: Configuration/PyReleaseValidation @perrotta, @pgunnell, @chayanit, @wajidalikhan, @kpedro88, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
please test workflow 159.11 |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
|
+1 |
Comparison job queued. |
@@ -704,6 +704,8 @@ def identitySim(wf): | |||
# INPUT command for reminiAOD wfs on UL-like relval inputs | |||
steps['TTbar_13_reminiaod2016UL_preVFP_INPUT']={'INPUT':InputInfo(dataSet='/RelValTTbar_13UP16/CMSSW_10_6_12-PU25ns_106X_mcRun2_asymptotic_preVFP_v8_hltul16_preVFP-v1/AODSIM',label='rmaod',location='STD')} | |||
steps['TTbar_13_reminiaod2016UL_postVFP_INPUT']={'INPUT':InputInfo(dataSet='/RelValTTbar_13UP16/CMSSW_10_6_12-PU25ns_106X_mcRun2_asymptotic_v13_hltul16_postVFP-v1/AODSIM',label='rmaod',location='STD')} | |||
# INPUT command for reminiAOD wfs on PbPb relval inputs | |||
steps['HydjetQ_reminiaodPbPb2021_INPUT']={'INPUT':InputInfo(dataSet='/RelValHydjetQ_B12_5020GeV_2021_ppReco/CMSSW_11_2_0_pre1-PU_111X_mcRun3_2021_realistic_HI_v5-v1/GEN-SIM-RECO',label='rmaod',location='STD')} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My goal from #30349 was to provide a reminiAOD setup using the target input dataset, which in this case would be from 10_3_X.
This one is apparently from 11_2_0, which makes this a bit impractical for the needs of reminiAOD
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, I assumed we would just do then when backporting to 10_6_X. But ok, we can run on a 10_3 input in the master. Will just have to fix the puppi issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can input instead the dataset: /RelValHydjetQ_B12_5020GeV_2018_ppReco/CMSSW_10_3_3-PU_103X_upgrade2018_realistic_HI_v11-v1/GEN-SIM-RECO
However, it's only at T1_US_FNAL_Disk.
What does one enter in the function InputInfo, for the argument 'location' instead of 'STD'?
@chayanit maybe you can give me a pointer here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is there an AOD file instead, to stay as close as possible to the (re)miniAOD scope?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, it seems we are still writing RECOSIM in all the relval workflows.
Comparison is ready @slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
Comparison Summary:
|
I understood that the (re)miniAOD will apply also to data. |
The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
|
+1 |
Comparison job queued. |
Comparison is ready Comparison Summary:
|
merge |
+1 |
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 be automatically merged. |
@mandrenguyen |
Adds a new workflows 140.5611 and 158.01, to test reMiniAOD in data and MC, respectively.
Requested in #30349