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

[HGCAL] Simplify makeHGCalValidationPlots #33639

Merged

Conversation

lecriste
Copy link
Contributor

@lecriste lecriste commented May 5, 2021

PR description:

This PR simplifies the code in makeHGCalValidationPlots.py and makes hgcalPlots.py more robust.
No changes are expected in the output.

PR validation:

runTheMatrix -l limited

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 5, 2021

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33639/22510

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 5, 2021

A new Pull Request was created by @lecriste (Leonardo Cristella) for master.

It involves the following packages:

Validation/HGCalValidation

@andrius-k, @kmaeshima, @ErnestaP, @ahmad3213, @cmsbuild, @jfernan2, @rvenditti can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@vandreev11, @sethzenz, @bsunanda, @rovere, @lgray, @cseez, @apsallid, @pfs, @hatakeyamak, @ebrondol this is something you requested to watch as well.
@silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@felicepantaleo
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 5, 2021

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-76a38b/14893/summary.html
COMMIT: 07ab2b1
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_0_X_2021-05-04-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/33639/14893/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • ROOTFileChecks: Some differences in event products or their sizes found
  • Reco comparison results: 104 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 37
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2658950
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 6
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2658921
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: -69.52 KiB( 36 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 23234.0,... ): -17.379 KiB HGCAL/HGCalValidator
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 312.0 ): -0.004 KiB MessageLogger/Warnings
  • Checked 155 log files, 37 edm output root files, 37 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

Copy link
Contributor

@felicepantaleo felicepantaleo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if this bug was introduced in 11_3_X and is still present, could you also provide a backport in 11_3?

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

jfernan2 commented May 5, 2021

@lecriste I don't undertand why the changes in eta and phi for Nun and NumDup (at least) for CaloParticle distributions are being introduced again. From your PR description I read no changes are expected. E.g.:
Base: https://tinyurl.com/yelgu3z6
PR: https://tinyurl.com/yzyakkzl

All changes: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/baseLineComparisons/CMSSW_12_0_X_2021-05-04-2300+76a38b/42636/dqm-histo-comparison-summary.html
Thanks

@lecriste
Copy link
Contributor Author

lecriste commented May 6, 2021

@jfernan2 I don't understand either: the two files modified by this PR are not producing those changes. For some reason the base comparison is run without #33488, and from the checks summary above I see 33545 (previous closed PR with same name from same branch) instead of this PR number in some listed items.
Shall I open another PR from a different branch?

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

jfernan2 commented May 6, 2021

please test
Let's run the test again to introduce last build into the comparison

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 6, 2021

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-76a38b/14900/summary.html
COMMIT: 07ab2b1
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_0_X_2021-05-05-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/33639/14900/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

The workflows 140.53 have different files in step1_dasquery.log than the ones found in the baseline. You may want to check and retrigger the tests if necessary. You can check it in the "files" directory in the results of the comparisons

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 1263 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 37
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2662646
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3672
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 20
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2658932
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: -45.699 KiB( 36 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): -44.531 KiB Hcal/DigiRunHarvesting
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 140.53 ): -1.172 KiB RPC/DCSInfo
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 312.0 ): 0.004 KiB MessageLogger/Warnings
  • Checked 155 log files, 37 edm output root files, 37 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

jfernan2 commented May 6, 2021

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 6, 2021

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-33639/22535

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 6, 2021

Pull request #33639 was updated. @andrius-k, @kmaeshima, @ErnestaP, @ahmad3213, @cmsbuild, @jfernan2, @rvenditti can you please check and sign again.

@ebrondol
Copy link
Contributor

ebrondol commented May 6, 2021

I would like to mention here that I still see duplicates of pdf plots when I run with the trackstersWithEdges option: https://ebrondol.web.cern.ch/ebrondol/HGCal/PR33639/plots1_trackstersEdges/plots1_Tracksters.html
This was discussed with @lecriste and decided to fix it in another PR which will come at a later point.

@lecriste
Copy link
Contributor Author

lecriste commented May 6, 2021

@jfernan2 can you please trigger the tests again?

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

jfernan2 commented May 7, 2021

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 7, 2021

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-76a38b/14927/summary.html
COMMIT: e1963e7
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_0_X_2021-05-06-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week1/cms-sw/cmssw/33639/14927/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 37
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2662646
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2662623
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 36 files compared)
  • Checked 155 log files, 37 edm output root files, 37 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

jfernan2 commented May 7, 2021

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented May 7, 2021

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. @silviodonato, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@lecriste
Copy link
Contributor Author

lecriste commented May 7, 2021

@silviodonato and @qliphy, it's good now :)

@qliphy
Copy link
Contributor

qliphy commented May 7, 2021

+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

7 participants