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
Conversation
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-40244/33298
|
A new Pull Request was created by @AdrianoDee for master. It involves the following packages:
@perrotta, @rappoccio, @bbilin, @cmsbuild, @AdrianoDee, @srimanob, @kskovpen, @sunilUIET, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
test parameters:
|
please test |
-1 Failed Tests: RelVals RelValsValueError: Undefined workflows: 20834.12021, 20834.18021, 20834.16021, 20834.1021, 11634.9021, 11634.1021, 11634.6021, 11634.4021 |
test parameters:
|
please test |
Hi @AdrianoDee |
Hi @srimanob, I adopted this because the trailing zeros are ignored (being a float) and then |
Still, it could make sense to find a better way to avoid booking `.60ˋ etc. |
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... |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-df9669/29476/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
-1 Failed Tests: RelVals-INPUT RelVals-INPUTThe relvals timed out after 4 hours. Comparison SummarySummary:
|
please test |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-df9669/29526/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
+Upgrade The failure in comparison of 11634.7 does not look like coming from this PR. |
Kindly ping @cms-sw/pdmv-l2 |
+pdmv |
@cms-sw/orp-l2 just a ping because this is basically fully signed (while it doesn't appear so for the |
+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. |
PR description:
This PR proposes the addition of
ProdLike
workflows with runningPU
conditions (usingAVE_YY_BX_25ns
scenarios):10
to100
for Run3;10
to180
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 forProdLike
wfs). The missingAVE_PU_BX_25ns
(andAVE_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.