[12_1_X] Replace Candidate GT in conddb unit test and update run3 data GT

[malbouis]

PR description:

This is a backport of PR #36402. I copy the description below, with the link for the 121X GT.

This PR has two updates:

• Replace a Candidate GT by a named GT in the conddb unit tests in view of AlCaDB policy of deleting Candidates GTs older than 6 months.
• Update the Run-3 data offline GT to be used for the Pilot Beam ReReco with ECAL PF Cluster corrections as request here: https://hypernews.cern.ch/HyperNews/CMS/get/calibrations/4562.html

The difference in the run-3 data offline GT wrt the previous version is shown below. The only differences are in the 16 updated multi-IOV tags that contain related to ECAL PC Cluster corrections:
https://cms-conddb.cern.ch/cmsDbBrowser/diff/Prod/gts/121X_dataRun3_v12/121X_dataRun3_v13

PR validation:

For the conddb unit tests: scram b runtests_test_conddb

For the offline Run-3 data GT: runTheMatrix.py -l 139.001 --ibeos -j16

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

Backport of #36402

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @malbouis for CMSSW_12_1_X.

It involves the following packages:

• CondCore/Utilities (db)
• Configuration/AlCa (alca)

@malbouis, @yuanchao, @cmsbuild, @ggovi, @francescobrivio, @tvami can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@Martin-Grunewald, @missirol, @mmusich, @fabiocos, @tocheng this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

• Backported from Replace Candidate GT by named GT in conddb script unit tests and update offline Run-3 data GT #36402

[malbouis]

test parameters:

• workflows=139.001

[malbouis]

please test

[tvami]

backport of #36402

[cmsbuild]

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10cb4c/21097/summary.html
COMMIT: 359343a
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_1_X_2021-12-07-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/36417/21097/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

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

• /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-10cb4c/139.001_RunMinimumBias2021+RunMinimumBias2021+HLTDR3_2021+RECODR3_MinBiasOffline+HARVESTD2021MB

Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 42
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2901440
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2901417
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 41 files compared)
• Checked 177 log files, 37 edm output root files, 42 DQM output files
• TriggerResults: no differences found

[tvami]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_12_1_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_12_3_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

[perrotta]

+1

• Update of the test script is needed in view of the ConfDB policy of deleting Candidates GTs older than 6 months
• GT update for 'run3_data' requested for the possible 2021 CRAFT and Pilot Beam reReco. The differences with respect the previous tag are in the 16 updated multi-IOV tags related to ECAL PF Cluster corrections

[francescobrivio]

 in view of the ConfDB policy of deleting Candidates GTs older than 6 months

Thanks @perrotta! Just for clarity: the policy is an AlCaDB policy, so a CondDB policy rather than ConfDB.

[perrotta]

 in view of the ConfDB policy of deleting Candidates GTs older than 6 months

Thanks @perrotta! Just for clarity: the policy is an AlCaDB policy, so a CondDB policy rather than ConfDB.

Yes, sure, it was a typo (copy-pasted into the three PRs approved...)