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

Adding Running PU ProdLike Wfs #40244

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Dec 12, 2022
Merged

Conversation

AdrianoDee
Copy link
Contributor

@AdrianoDee AdrianoDee commented Dec 6, 2022

PR description:

This PR proposes the addition of ProdLike workflows with running PU conditions (using AVE_YY_BX_25ns scenarios):

  • from 10 to 100 for Run3;
  • from 10 to 180 for Phase2.

These could be useful to cyclically test how the production timing scales in "continuous" PU conditions. The suffixes follows the scheme: .21PU1 (given that .21 is the suffix for ProdLike wfs). The missing AVE_PU_BX_25ns (and AVE_PU_BX_50ns for consistency) scenarios have been added accordingly.

PR validation:

Running, e.g., *.21101, *.21601 and *.21801 wfs.

PR Backport

A back-port to 12_6_X could be useful but not mandatory.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 6, 2022

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-40244/33298

  • This PR adds an extra 32KB to repository

  • There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 6, 2022

A new Pull Request was created by @AdrianoDee for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • Configuration/PyReleaseValidation (pdmv, upgrade)
  • Configuration/StandardSequences (operations)

@perrotta, @rappoccio, @bbilin, @cmsbuild, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob, @kskovpen, @sunilUIET, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@beaucero, @fabiocos, @VourMa, @makortel, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @JanFSchulte, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @missirol, @kpedro88, @lecriste, @trtomei, @mmusich, @sameasy, @mtosi, @dgulhan, @slomeo this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@AdrianoDee
Copy link
Contributor Author

test parameters:

  • workflows = 11634.1021, 11634.6021, 11634.4021, 11634.9021, 20834.16021, 20834.12021, 20834.18021, 20834.1021

@AdrianoDee
Copy link
Contributor Author

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 6, 2022

-1

Failed Tests: RelVals
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-df9669/29474/summary.html
COMMIT: 2e6a7a1
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_0_X_2022-12-05-2300/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/40244/29474/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

RelVals

ValueError: Undefined workflows: 20834.12021, 20834.18021, 20834.16021, 20834.1021, 11634.9021, 11634.1021, 11634.6021, 11634.4021

@AdrianoDee
Copy link
Contributor Author

test parameters:

  • workflows = 11634.1021, 11634.6021, 11634.4021, 11634.9021, 20834.16021, 20834.12021, 20834.18021, 20834.1021
  • relvals_opt= -w upgrade

@AdrianoDee
Copy link
Contributor Author

please test

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor

srimanob commented Dec 6, 2022

Hi @AdrianoDee
Would it be easier with .21XXX for suffix? Will it look more like a same family of .21?
So we can keep the suffix, i.e 60, .70, .80, for other customizations.

@AdrianoDee
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @srimanob, I adopted this because the trailing zeros are ignored (being a float) and then .2110 and .2100 would end up being duplicates.

@AdrianoDee
Copy link
Contributor Author

AdrianoDee commented Dec 6, 2022

Still, it could make sense to find a better way to avoid booking `.60ˋ etc.

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

kpedro88 commented Dec 6, 2022

The numbering scheme is a little bit in conflict with the existing .9921, which is the PremixProdLike workflow. There's also a .999 workflow for Phase2 premix with PU 50, which is part of the short matrix. I'm not really that worried about the numbering scheme in general (since we don't tend to be too strict about it), but I just wanted to make sure everyone is aware of the existing workflows.

It would also be good to keep https://github.com/cms-sw/cmssw/blob/master/Configuration/PyReleaseValidation/README.md up to date...

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 6, 2022

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-df9669/29476/summary.html
COMMIT: 2e6a7a1
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_0_X_2022-12-05-2300/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/40244/29476/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: 8 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3421337
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 152
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3421163
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 47 files compared)
  • Checked 206 log files, 158 edm output root files, 48 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 9, 2022

-1

Failed Tests: RelVals-INPUT
Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-df9669/29525/summary.html
COMMIT: bef46be
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_0_X_2022-12-08-1100/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/40244/29525/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

RelVals-INPUT

The relvals timed out after 4 hours.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 5 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3421214
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 3
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3421189
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 47 files compared)
  • Checked 206 log files, 158 edm output root files, 48 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@AdrianoDee
Copy link
Contributor Author

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Dec 9, 2022

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-df9669/29526/summary.html
COMMIT: bef46be
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_0_X_2022-12-08-1100/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/40244/29526/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: 34 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3421214
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 1195
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3419997
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 47 files compared)
  • Checked 206 log files, 158 edm output root files, 48 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor

srimanob commented Dec 9, 2022

+Upgrade

The failure in comparison of 11634.7 does not look like coming from this PR.

@srimanob
Copy link
Contributor

Kindly ping @cms-sw/pdmv-l2
Thx.

@kskovpen
Copy link
Contributor

+pdmv

@AdrianoDee
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cms-sw/orp-l2 just a ping because this is basically fully signed (while it doesn't appear so for the operations-pending). Thanks.

@perrotta
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 be automatically merged.

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit 9b3679a into cms-sw:master Dec 12, 2022
@AdrianoDee AdrianoDee deleted the wfs_running_pu branch February 16, 2023 09:45
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

6 participants