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

GTs updated with Tracking, SiStripDQM Trigger Keys, HCAL electronics map, ZeroMaterial Geom #18136

Conversation

arunhep
Copy link
Contributor

@arunhep arunhep commented Mar 30, 2017

Summary of changes in Global Tags

RunI simulation

RunII simulation

RunI data

RunII data

Upgrade

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @arunhep (Arun Kumar) for master.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/AlCa

@ghellwig, @arunhep, @cerminar, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @mmusich, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @Martin-Grunewald, @ghellwig, @tocheng this is something you requested to watch as well.
@Muzaffar, @davidlange6, @smuzaffar you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here #13028

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Mar 30, 2017

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 30, 2017

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/18811/console Started: 2017/03/31 00:25

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Mar 31, 2017

@fioriNTU FYI

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor

@makortel
Copy link
Contributor

I'm not really sure why the improvement does not show up in PR tests, maybe it (and the original efficiency drop in HP) is visible only with pileup?

(I just re-tested in 900 and the tag from CondDB that the improvement is there in ttbar+35PU)

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

mmusich commented Mar 31, 2017

@arunhep

@mmusich is this expected? https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/baseLineComparisons/CMSSW_9_1_X_2017-03-30-1100+18136/19110/4.53_RunPhoton2012B+RunPhoton2012B+HLTD+RECODR1reHLT+HARVESTDR1reHLT/AlCaReco.html

No. It is not expected. On the other hand the conditions are instead exactly what one expects.

For instance the Global Tag used in the run1_data and run2_data is exactly the same:

and if I compare the payloads for AlCaRecoTriggerBits_TrackerDQM_v5_offline and AlCaRecoTriggerBits_TrackerDQM_v6_offline in the different IOVs:

cmsrel CMSSW_9_1_X_2017-03-30-2300
cd CMSSW_9_1_X_2017-03-30-2300/src/
cmsenv
git cms-addpkg CondTools/HLT
cd CondTools/HLT/test/
cmsRun AlCaRecoTriggerBitsRcdRead_TEMPL_cfg.py inputTag=AlCaRecoTriggerBits_TrackerDQM_v6_offline
cmsRun AlCaRecoTriggerBitsRcdRead_TEMPL_cfg.py inputTag=AlCaRecoTriggerBits_TrackerDQM_v5_offline
diff -u triggerBitsAlCaRecoTriggerBits_TrackerDQM_v5_offline.twiki triggerBitsAlCaRecoTriggerBits_TrackerDQM_v6_offline.twiki

resulting in:

--- triggerBitsAlCaRecoTriggerBits_TrackerDQM_v5_offline.twiki	2017-03-31 11:47:00.529893225 +0200
+++ triggerBitsAlCaRecoTriggerBits_TrackerDQM_v6_offline.twiki	2017-03-31 11:44:49.853437522 +0200
@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 ---+++++ *IOV*: 1-264291
 | *TriggerBits list key* | *HLT paths* |
-| 'SiStrip_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_HIZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_BptxAnd_*' |
+| 'SiStrip_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_HIZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_BptxAnd_*', 'HLT_L1SingleMuOpen_v*', 'HLT_PAL1MinimumBiasHF_OR_SinglePixelTrack_*' |
+| 'SiStrip_IB_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_FirstCollisionAfterAbortGap_*', 'HLT_ZeroBias_IsolatedBunches_v*' |
 | 'SiStrip_L1' | 'L1_ZeroBias' |
 | 'Tracking_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_HIZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_BptxAnd_*' |
 | 'Tracking_HLT_HIP_OOT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_FirstBXAfterTrain_v*' |
@@ -8,7 +9,8 @@
 | 'Tracking_HLT_noHIP_noOOT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_FirstCollisionAfterAbortGap_v*' |
 ---+++++ *IOV*: 264292-284024
 | *TriggerBits list key* | *HLT paths* |
-| 'SiStrip_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_HIZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_BptxAnd_*' |
+| 'SiStrip_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_HIZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_BptxAnd_*', 'HLT_L1SingleMuOpen_v*', 'HLT_PAL1MinimumBiasHF_OR_SinglePixelTrack_*' |
+| 'SiStrip_IB_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_FirstCollisionAfterAbortGap_*', 'HLT_ZeroBias_IsolatedBunches_v*' |
 | 'SiStrip_L1' | 'L1Tech_BPTX_plus_AND_minus.v0', 'L1_ZeroBias', 'L1_ExtCond_032' |
 | 'Tracking_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_HIZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_BptxAnd_*' |
 | 'Tracking_HLT_HIP_OOT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_FirstBXAfterTrain_v*' |
@@ -16,7 +18,8 @@
 | 'Tracking_HLT_noHIP_noOOT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_FirstCollisionAfterAbortGap_v*' |
 ---+++++ *IOV*: 284025-500000
 | *TriggerBits list key* | *HLT paths* |
-| 'SiStrip_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_HIZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_BptxAnd_*', 'HLT_L1SingleMuOpen_v*', 'HLT_ZeroBias_FirstCollisionAfterAbortGap_*', 'HLT_ZeroBias_IsolatedBunches_v*', 'HLT_PAL1MinimumBiasHF_OR_SinglePixelTrack_*' |
+| 'SiStrip_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_HIZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_BptxAnd_*', 'HLT_L1SingleMuOpen_v*', 'HLT_PAL1MinimumBiasHF_OR_SinglePixelTrack_*' |
+| 'SiStrip_IB_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_FirstCollisionAfterAbortGap_*', 'HLT_ZeroBias_IsolatedBunches_v*' |
 | 'SiStrip_L1' | 'L1Tech_BPTX_plus_AND_minus.v0', 'L1_ZeroBias', 'L1_ExtCond_032', 'L1_MinimumBiasHF0_OR_BptxAND*' |
 | 'Tracking_HLT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_HIZeroBias_v*', 'HLT_BptxAnd_*', 'HLT_PAL1MinimumBiasHF_OR_SinglePixelTrack_*' |
 | 'Tracking_HLT_HIP_OOT' | 'HLT_ZeroBias_FirstBXAfterTrain_v*' |

change in conditions for the IOV for 2012B (the run probed in wf 4.53 is 194533 which falls in the IOV 1-264291) is the same as for the IOV for 2016B (wf 136.731 uses run 274199 which falls in IOV 264292-284024).

On the other hand as you pointed out there are differences in 4.53
but none in 136.731....

I am wondering if it is related with the reproducibility issue (to my knowledge not yet solved) detailed in https://its.cern.ch/jira/browse/CMSTRACK-151 (@fioriNTU, @mtosi)

@franzoni
Copy link

I am wondering if it is related with the reproducibility issue (to my knowledge not yet solved)

We've had instability in that folder of plots in all pull requests I've scrutinized this year, irrespective of whether changes effected alcarecos or not.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 3, 2017

Pull request #18136 was updated. @ghellwig, @arunhep, @cerminar, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @mmusich, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again.

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Apr 3, 2017

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 3, 2017

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/18869/console Started: 2017/04/03 15:14

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Apr 3, 2017

Description updated with the latest commit for including L1 Prescale and Vetoes for MC.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 3, 2017

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 3, 2017

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 3, 2017

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Apr 3, 2017

+1
All the differences observed are expected and has been explained.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 3, 2017

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 requires discussion in the ORP meeting before it's merged. @Muzaffar, @davidlange6, @smuzaffar

@arunhep
Copy link
Contributor Author

arunhep commented Apr 3, 2017

@rekovic FYI

@davidlange6
Copy link
Contributor

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit b6eda34 into cms-sw:master Apr 5, 2017
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