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
[NanoAOD] PileupJetId speed up #36848
[NanoAOD] PileupJetId speed up #36848
Conversation
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36848/28074
|
A new Pull Request was created by @nurfikri89 (Nurfikri Norjoharuddeen) for master. It involves the following packages:
@cmsbuild, @mariadalfonso, @gouskos, @fgolf can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
enable profiling |
(run2_jme_2016 & ~tracker_apv_vfp30_2016 ).toModify( jetTable.variables.puId, doc="Pileup ID flags with 106X (2016) training") | ||
(run2_jme_2016 & tracker_apv_vfp30_2016 ).toModify( jetTable.variables.puIdDisc, doc="Pileup ID discriminant with 106X (2016APV) training") | ||
(run2_jme_2016 & tracker_apv_vfp30_2016 ).toModify( jetTable.variables.puId, doc="Pileup ID flags with 106X (2016APV) training") | ||
run2_nanoAOD_102Xv1.toModify( jetTable.variables.puIdDisc, doc="Pileup ID discriminant with 102X (2018) training") |
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 suspect that changing order here is not good and lead to changes in the 102Xv1 and 2017 era.
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.
Will revert to the original ordering in the next commit.
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-b10430/22121/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36848/28111
|
Pull request #36848 was updated. @cmsbuild, @mariadalfonso, @gouskos, @fgolf can you please check and sign again. |
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-b10430/22153/summary.html Comparison Summary@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
Summary:
|
+xpog re-arranged sequences with modifiers |
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. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
@mariadalfonso Should this be backported? |
@nurfikri89 it's not needed for now, usually we do not backport speed up and next V10 Run2 nano production will be likely made with master |
PR description:
This PR is to address the issue (cms-nanoAOD#586) regarding the slow speed of pileupJetId calculation in NanoAOD production. Now, only one instance of
PileupJetIdProducer
is scheduled and configured according to era. No changes in output is expected.Below is a comparison of the cpu usage between
CMSSW_12_3_0_pre4
and this PR using a TTJets ULMiniAODv2 sample as input with 5000 events.Default (
CMSSW_12_3_0_pre4
)This PR
PR validation:
passes the usual runTheMatrix test:
runTheMatrix.py -l limited -i all --ibeos
Backports:
This PR should be backported 10_6_X if there is a plan for Ultra-Legacy NanoAODv10 production in the future.