Debugged beam-spot monitor based on pixel vertices

[dinardo]

Debugged special conditions related to non sequencial lumisections and color fill summaryPlot.
I've also cleaned up the python configuration file.
The program has been tested on run-2 BTagMu dataset.

I recommend to double check the configuration for the "GlobalTag" and in general the configuration to run at P5 since I've changed the python config file in a couple od places calle "for testing purposes" in order to be able to run on lxplus.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @dinardo (Mauro) for CMSSW_7_4_X.

Debugged beam-spot monitor based on pixel vertices

It involves the following packages:

DQM/BeamMonitor
DQM/Integration

@cmsbuild, @danduggan, @deguio can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@threus, @batinkov 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.

[dinardo]

I forgot to ask, is this modification going also in to the CMSSW releases that are higher up ? Like 7_5, 7_6 and so on and so forth ? Or I need to make special pull requests for those releases ?
Many thanks.

[smuzaffar]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

+1

Tested at: 55de30e

you can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10844/7449/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10844/7449/summary.html

[dinardo]

Dear All,
what am I supposed to do ?
I compiled it when I tested it and no warning nor error message appeared.
Am I supposed to do something about these errors ?

Many thanks,

• Mauro.

On 18 Aug 2015, at 11:26 pm, Malik Shahzad Muzaffar notifications@github.com wrote:

please test

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[danduggan]

-1
@dinardo, in general for modules only run in online DQM, you would make requests to 74/75/76. However, looking at the code, it seems like this module was never migrated to use migrated DQMEDAnalyzer and is in serious need of revision. specifically, no booking of histos is allowed in the analyze method any longer, nor is direct access to dqmstore within the code. I'm going to reject this for now, and in the meantime we can follow up offline for how to best proceed.

[dinardo]

Hi,
sounds good.

If you just tell me what modifications are needed,
I can make them right away. I guess they are not
substantial since this module is working nicely in
7_4_9.

Many thanks,

• Mauro.

On 19 Aug 2015, at 1:38 pm, danduggan notifications@github.com wrote:

-1
@dinardo, in general for modules only run in online DQM, you would make requests to 74/75/76. However, looking at the code, it seems like this module was never migrated to use migrated DQMEDAnalyzer and is in serious need of revision. specifically, no booking of histos is allowed in the analyze method any longer, nor is direct access to dqmstore within the code. I'm going to reject this for now, and in the meantime we can follow up offline for how to best proceed.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[dinardo]

• Fixed important bugs
• Implemented modifications for future release compatibility

I recommend to double check the configuration for the "GlobalTag" and in general the configuration to run at P5 since I've changed the python config file in a couple of places called "for testing purposes" in order to be able to test the code on lxplus.

[dinardo]

OK done.
I've rolled back as you suggested.
Sorry about that,

• Mauro.

[deguio]

please test

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #10844 was updated. @cmsbuild, @danduggan, @deguio can you please check and sign again.

[cmsbuild]

Pull request #10844 was updated. @cmsbuild, @danduggan, @deguio can you please check and sign again.

[deguio]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_4_X IBs once checked with relvals in the development release cycle of CMSSW or unless it breaks tests. This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: 2818a3c
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10844/8088/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_4_X IBs once checked with relvals in the development release cycle of CMSSW (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-10844/8088/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_7_4_X IBs once checked with relvals in the development release cycle of CMSSW (tests are also fine). This pull request requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @davidlange6, @Degano, @smuzaffar