Turn CCC off for Express and Prompt processing, for Run2 scenarios.

[rovere]

The title says it all.
scram b runtests under Configuration/DataProcessing/test returns all successes.

@venturia @VinInn

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @rovere (Marco Rovere) for CMSSW_7_4_X.

Turn CCC off for Express and Prompt processing, for Run2 scenarios.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/DataProcessing

@cmsbuild, @franzoni, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @Martin-Grunewald this is something you requested to watch as well.
You can sign-off by replying to this message having '+1' in the first line of your reply.
You can reject by replying to this message having '-1' in the first line of your reply.
If you are a L2 or a release manager you can ask for tests by saying 'please test' in the first line of a comment.
@Degano you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[slava77]

Marco, please add a customization function some place in RecoTracker.Configuration to be able to apply the same in matrix workflows

[rovere]

Ciao Slava, I already replied to you via email and I'm wondering if those 2 lines could be "manually" passed to cmsDriver to produce the RelVal. A customise for this seems to be an overkill.
If there is no alternative, I can easily prepare it.

[slava77]

I prefer a function.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #9987 was updated. @cmsbuild, @cvuosalo, @franzoni, @davidlange6, @slava77 can you please check and sign again.

[slava77]

nice, thanks

[slava77]

@cmsbuild please test
I think that the customiseNoCCC can be propagated to 75X/76X as well

[VinInn]

unrelated:
maybe we ca get rid of "planBTracking"
it does not apply anymore as is...

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[slava77]

On 7/1/15 11:40 AM, Vincenzo Innocente wrote:

unrelated:
maybe we ca get rid of "planBTracking"
it does not apply anymore as is...

I don't even know what it is ;)
Is it a tracking version that was added before the big bang?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#9987 (comment).

[VinInn]

@slava77
most probably in a parallel (B) universe

[Martin-Grunewald]

@slava77
Good question!- Can you explain why you switch this off?

[slava77]

@Martin-Grunewald
the intention is to disable it for 50ns running in prompt/express reco.
This is triggered by concerns in the tracker calibrations quality.

[slava77]

it looks like HLT is not using these in the 50ns tables. So, no action is needed for HLT

[Martin-Grunewald]

@slava77
OK, good to know. Thanks!

[slava77]

+1

for #9987 3fd3676

• the customization function works at the runTheMatrix --command level

I ran comparisons with this more disabled: there are differences in the usual suspects, as detailed below. I'd say that for most cases we can live with a similar level data-MC discrepancy.

• strip-based seeding
  • in 50202 (PU35 at 50 ns MC) about 20% more seeds in mixed triplet and pixel-less and about 40% more in the tob-tec iterations
• tracking fake rates
  • high purity fakes in the barrel up by ~50%
  • general tracks fake rate increase is smaller (more visible increase at higher PU)
• dedx distributions
  Nothing particularly significant beyond this.
  The following plots are from 50202 DQM (400 events run)
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

On the technical side (based on 50202)

• reco step time goes up by 7%

  delta/mean delta/orJob     original                   new       module name
  ---------- ------------     --------                  ----       ------------
   +0.609220      +0.34%       228.74 ms/ev ->       429.13 ms/ev tobTecStepTrackCandidates
   +0.456152      +0.30%       299.11 ms/ev ->       475.87 ms/ev pixelLessStepTrackCandidates
   +0.399381      +0.06%        66.55 ms/ev ->        99.76 ms/ev tobTecStepSeedsTripl
   +0.242304      +0.05%       110.02 ms/ev ->       140.35 ms/ev pixelLessStepTracks
   +0.182235      +0.15%       440.42 ms/ev ->       528.72 ms/ev pixelLessStepSeeds
   +0.164758      +0.11%       349.56 ms/ev ->       412.33 ms/ev lowPtTripletStepTrackCandidates
   +0.121433      +0.12%       558.80 ms/ev ->       631.05 ms/ev detachedTripletStepTrackCandidates

[slava77]

@davidlange6 are we waiting for some additional re-confirmation that this is good to go for prompt/express?