Added mixing scenario for PU250 PU300 in Configuration/StandardSequences/python/Mixing.py

[siddhesh86]

Added mixing scenaring AVE_250_BX_25ns and AVE_300_BX_25ns for PU250, PU300 in Configuration/StandardSequences/python/Mixing.py with CMSSW_9_3_7.

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @siddhesh86 for CMSSW_9_3_X.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/StandardSequences

@cmsbuild, @franzoni, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @dgulhan this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @slava77, @fabiocos, @kpedro88 you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

• Backported from Added Mixing scenario for PU250 and PU300 #24821

[kpedro88]

please test

[kpedro88]

@siddhesh86 is this a backport?

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/jenkins/job/ib-any-integration/30893/console Started: 2018/10/04 23:11

[cmsbuild]

+1
Tested at: c93a2fb
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-24808/30893/summary.html

[cmsbuild]

Comparison job queued.

[siddhesh86]

@siddhesh86 is this a backport?

Actually, I want these modifications to generate few samples (with CMSSW_9_3_7) urgently needed for high PU test with tracker reconstruction. It would be good to have high PU scenarios in latest releases also. But for this pull request, today I started with the latest repository on CMSSW9_3_X branch and added those two lines.

[cmsbuild]

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-24808/30893/summary.html

Comparison Summary:

• No significant changes to the logs found
• Reco comparison results: 0 differences found in the comparisons
• DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 25
• DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2624448
• DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 218
• DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
• DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2624053
• DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 177
• DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
• DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: -24 KiB( 24 files compared)
• Checked 105 log files, 8 edm output root files, 25 DQM output files

[kpedro88]

Please submit a corresponding PR to the master branch

[siddhesh86]

Please submit a corresponding PR to the master branch
I have submitted a corresponding pull request to the master branch (PR #24821). Thank you Kevin.

[kpedro88]

backport of #24821

[kpedro88]

@siddhesh86 we would like to understand the use case for this PR in 93X. The state of the phase 2 tracker (geometry, digitization, etc.) has developed substantially since 93X was used for last year's TDRs. Is there a concrete plan for what samples will be produced with 300PU, what timescale is necessary, and what we expect to learn? Otherwise it might be easier and more profitable to use 10_3_X or 10_4_X along with the upcoming MTD TDR production.

[siddhesh86]

@kpedro88 SingleNeutrino samples were produced with PU0, 140 and 200 with CMSSW_9_3_7. Now its PU250 and 300 samples are needed for TrackTrigger stress tests and they are needed to be produced with the same cmssw release.

[boudoul]

Hello @siddhesh86 I'm sorry but I'm connfused :

The results of the stress test , in particular performance with samples at PU 250-300 have been presented last week at Budapest during the CMS week, see for example slide 7-8-9 https://indico.cern.ch/event/704625/contributions/3148729/attachments/1728209/2792182/StressTest_CMSweek_4oct2018.pdf
The samples are liste on slide 21.

After this presentation, the stress test has been declared over by the stress test committee : https://indico.cern.ch/event/704625/contributions/3148730/attachments/1728364/2792516/closeout.pdf
...

[siddhesh86]

Hello @boudoul , I produced ttbar RelVal samples with PU250, 300 by manually implementing the modifications (that I proposed in this pull request) into my local cmssw. Now I have to produce SingleNeutrino samples with higher PU using McM tool. The McM fetches cmssw on its own. So I need these high PU scenarios in the official cmssw release.

[boudoul]

thanks @siddhesh86 . I know the technicalities of MCM, but the point is more to understand the use case since you wrote that it is for the stress test but the stress test has been declared over last week. This is why I'm confused about the use case...

[siddhesh86]

@boudoul: I got the request for SingleNeutrino sample saying it is needed for the stress test. Sorry but I don't know about it in much detail.

[rekovic]

Hi @boudul
Stress tests you are mentioning were done for the Track Trigger using TTBar RelVal samples.
For the Phase2 Level-1 Trigger, PU250 and PU300 NuGun and a few signal samples are needed for the stress tests of the algorithms under development (to evaluate rates and efficiencies in severe conditions and identify points of failure).

[rekovic]

Hi @boudoul
Stress tests you are mentioning were done for the Track Trigger using TTBar RelVal samples.
For the Phase2 Level-1 Trigger, PU250 and PU300 NuGun and a few signal samples are needed for the stress tests of the algorithms under development (to evaluate rates and efficiencies in severe conditions and identify points of failure).

[siddhesh86]

Hi all,
Have you reached any conclusion/decision about this pull request?

[rekovic]

@fabiocos
I don't see any issue with this simple PR and should be merged so we can produce samples.

[fabiocos]

@rekovic @boudoul @kpedro88 @siddhesh86 the PR itself is trivial, and I caan merge it. The general plan for studies is outside the scope of this discussion, and should be better clarified. In general I would push to move the work to a newer code base

[fabiocos]

+operations

trivial addition of new mixing scenarios

[fabiocos]

+1

[cmsbuild]

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_9_3_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_10_4_X is complete. This pull request will be automatically merged.

[siddhesh86]

Thank you for merging the modifications into cmssw_9_3_X branch.
Can you please tell me in which cmssw release these modifications will be included? And do I have to do something for that?

[kpedro88]

a release is being built, see: #24864

[siddhesh86]

Thank you @kpedro88