auto pseudo parabolic for data taking or field from DB for B 0T mostly (fix of #9009 )

[slava77]

This provides a python-based auto-selection of the field to be served in the tracker as parabolicMF.

• proper parabolic for 3.8 T
• uniform 0 for 0 T
• parameterized engine values for intermediate field values

[cmsbuild]

A new Pull Request was created by @slava77 (Slava Krutelyov) for CMSSW_7_3_X.

auto pseudo parabolic for data taking or field from DB for B 0T mostly (fix of #9009 )

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/StandardSequences
MagneticField/ParametrizedEngine
MagneticField/UniformEngine

@nclopezo, @cvuosalo, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @appeltel, @namapane, @makortel, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @cerati, @dgulhan 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.
@nclopezo you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

[davidlange6]

@cmsbuild, please test

On May 8, 2015, at 6:35 PM, cmsbuild notifications@github.com wrote:

A new Pull Request was created by @slava77 (Slava Krutelyov) for CMSSW_7_3_X.

auto pseudo parabolic for data taking or field from DB for B 0T mostly (fix of #9009 )

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/StandardSequences
MagneticField/ParametrizedEngine
MagneticField/UniformEngine

@nclopezo, @cvuosalo, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @slava77, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@ghellwig, @appeltel, @namapane, @makortel, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @cerati, @dgulhan 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.
@nclopezo you are the release manager for this.
You can merge this pull request by typing 'merge' in the first line of your comment.

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

[slava77]

this one should be good (the original topic branch implementation ran fine already, need to make diffs)

[cmsbuild]

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.

[slava77]

+1

somewhat pre-emptively (wait for jenkins to come back with results just in case)

[davidlange6]

want the build to run during dinner - will merge and see how it goes.

[cmsbuild]

-1
Tested at: eb7ab6c
The relvals timed out after 2 hours.

you can see the results of the tests here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9015/4590/summary.html

[slava77]

I ran short matrix locally and checked there are no differences before my
+1. The only caveat is that test was on the old topic branch and this one
id a cherry pick of the same commits
On May 8, 2015 3:46 PM, "cmsbuild" notifications@github.com wrote:

-1
Tested at: eb7ab6c
eb7ab6c
The relvals timed out after 2 hours.

you can see the results of the tests here:

https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9015/4590/summary.html

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#9015 (comment).

[slava77]

Btw. I noticed that pu wflows with mixing are extremely slow today. 25202
was running at 5mins per event or so
On May 8, 2015 4:24 PM, "Slava" slava77@gmail.com wrote:

I ran short matrix locally and checked there are no differences before my
+1. The only caveat is that test was on the old topic branch and this one
id a cherry pick of the same commits
On May 8, 2015 3:46 PM, "cmsbuild" notifications@github.com wrote:

-1
Tested at: eb7ab6c
eb7ab6c
The relvals timed out after 2 hours.

you can see the results of the tests here:

https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-9015/4590/summary.html

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#9015 (comment).