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

Re-introduce BeamSpotOnlineProducer for Phase-2 HLT menu #41193

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Apr 3, 2023

Conversation

mmusich
Copy link
Contributor

@mmusich mmusich commented Mar 27, 2023

PR description:

This PR proposes a somewhat alternative approach to deliver the online Beam Spot to the HLT menu in Phase-2 as the one introduced at #41047.
The goal is to re-align the Phase-2 HLT configuration to be the same as in Run3 (i.e. use BeamSpotOnlineProducer instead of BeamSpotProducer) this is achieved by means of:

  • adding the hltOnlineBeamSpotESProducer (ESProducer for the arbitration) to the HLT menu itself;
  • set useTransientRecord = True in the onlineBeamSpot configuration (in this way one do not need to use scalers input any longer);

As with the proposed configuration the BeamSpotOnlineProducer falls back into producing the in the event the content of the DB (BeamSpotObjectsRcd) this should not introduce any change in the HLT results.
One of the main objections to use BeamSpotOnlineProducer for the phase-2 setup was about the fact that it needs to consume BeamSpotOnlineCollection from the SCAL FED (which doesn't exist anymore in >= Run3). I therefore profit of this PR to change BeamSpotOnlineProducer in order to not consume it unless useTransientRecord is set to False. This and declaring this parameter as optional in the fillDescription method of BeamSpotOnlineProducer allows to avoid declaring hltScalersRawToDigi as input collection.

PR validation:

Successfully run:

  • runTheMatrix.py -l 20834.76
  • addOnTests.py

If this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR. If this PR will be backported please specify to which release cycle the backport is meant for:

N/A

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-41193/34886

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @mmusich (Marco Musich) for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • HLTrigger/Configuration (hlt)
  • RecoVertex/BeamSpotProducer (reconstruction, alca)

@Martin-Grunewald, @clacaputo, @cmsbuild, @missirol, @saumyaphor4252, @tvami, @mandrenguyen, @francescobrivio can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@beaucero, @VourMa, @silviodonato, @SohamBhattacharya, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @JanFSchulte, @tocheng, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @missirol, @rovere, @mmusich, @mtosi, @dgulhan, @francescobrivio this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor

tvami commented Mar 27, 2023

@cmsbuild , please test workflow 20834.76

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-0346f4/31613/summary.html
COMMIT: 0df6bdc
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_1_X_2023-03-27-1100/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/41193/31613/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • You potentially added 11 lines to the logs
  • Reco comparison results: 16 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 49
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3554286
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 10
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3554254
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 48 files compared)
  • Checked 213 log files, 164 edm output root files, 49 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor

tvami commented Mar 27, 2023

+alca

  • tests pass
  • PR according to the desc

@missirol
Copy link
Contributor

@beaucero @SohamBhattacharya , please have a look and let us know if you agree with this change to the Phase-2 HLT menu (cc: @fwyzard , as author of #41047).

@fwyzard
Copy link
Contributor

fwyzard commented Mar 29, 2023

@mmusich @missirol, what behaviour do we rely on for Run-3 ?

@mmusich
Copy link
Contributor Author

mmusich commented Mar 29, 2023

what behaviour do we rely on for Run-3 ?

we use the same setup that is proposed here.

@SohamBhattacharya
Copy link
Contributor

If there are no objections from TSG (e.g. @beaucero @SohamBhattacharya), I'll sign off for HLT by the end of the week.

Hi, this looks fine as far as Phase-2 HLT is concerned. Please go ahead.
Thanks!

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-0346f4/31679/summary.html
COMMIT: de56fce
CMSSW: CMSSW_13_1_X_2023-03-29-1100/el8_amd64_gcc11
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/41193/31679/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • You potentially added 32 lines to the logs
  • Reco comparison results: 9 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 49
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3554236
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 13
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3554201
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 48 files compared)
  • Checked 213 log files, 164 edm output root files, 49 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@missirol
Copy link
Contributor

+hlt

@tvami
Copy link
Contributor

tvami commented Mar 29, 2023

+alca

  • tests pass
  • PR according to the desc

@clacaputo
Copy link
Contributor

+reconstruction

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Apr 3, 2023

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 now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @rappoccio (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@rappoccio
Copy link
Contributor

+1

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.

8 participants