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

Use correct beamspot for 2016 MC + update MC tracker alignment scenario for 2016 pre-VFP era [11_0_X] #28824

Conversation

christopheralanwest
Copy link
Contributor

PR description:

This PR is a trivial backport of PR #28624. The updates contained in this PR will be included in the 10_6_X 2016 UL production and the changes have already been merged in master. A 10_6_X backport PR will be prepared as well.

I'm not certain that an 11_0_X backport is strictly necessary as no 2016 production campaign is planned for 11_0_X; the 10_6_X backport is more important. But since these changes will be used in both 11_1_X and 10_6_X, it seems less confusing to have the changes in 11_0_X as well. Since this PR is mainly intended for the bookkeeping of sensible default values for RelVal workflows, I will let PdmV experts decide if they want it merged in 11_0_X as well.

PR validation:

The changes have been validated within the 2016 10_6_X UL campaign: https://indico.cern.ch/event/865993/#15-tracker-on-ul-16

In addition, a technical test was performed: runTheMatrix.py -l limited,7.22 --ibeos

if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:

This PR is a backport of PR #28624.

@christopheralanwest
Copy link
Contributor Author

backport #28624

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Jan 29, 2020

A new Pull Request was created by @christopheralanwest for CMSSW_11_0_X.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/AlCa
Configuration/PyReleaseValidation
TauAnalysis/MCEmbeddingTools

@pgunnell, @civanch, @chayanit, @zhenhu, @christopheralanwest, @mdhildreth, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @tocheng, @tlampen, @pohsun, @santocch, @kpedro88 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @Martin-Grunewald, @mmusich, @tocheng this is something you requested to watch as well.
@davidlange6, @silviodonato, @fabiocos you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@christopheralanwest
Copy link
Contributor Author

please test workflow 7.22

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Jan 29, 2020

The tests are being triggered in jenkins.
Test Parameters:

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1
Tested at: c6a7b47
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d7945c/4420/summary.html
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_0_X_2020-01-29-1100
SCRAM_ARCH: slc7_amd64_gcc820

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison job queued.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Comparison is ready
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-d7945c/4420/summary.html

@slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:

  • /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/results/JR-comparison/PR-d7945c/7.22_Cosmics_UP16+Cosmics_UP16+DIGICOS_UP16+RECOCOS_UP16+ALCACOS_UP16+HARVESTCOS_UP16

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 6669 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 34
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2793840
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 20622
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2772877
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 341
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.654 KiB( 33 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 25202.0 ): 0.654 KiB SiStrip/MechanicalView
  • Checked 147 log files, 16 edm output root files, 34 DQM output files

@chayanit
Copy link

+1

@christopheralanwest
Copy link
Contributor Author

+1

@civanch
Copy link
Contributor

civanch commented Jan 30, 2020

+1

@silviodonato
Copy link
Contributor

Kind reminder to
analysis:
@santocch
upgrade:
@kpedro88

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

kpedro88 commented Feb 3, 2020

+upgrade
@silviodonato i'm not sure if we will get analysis signatures any more

@silviodonato
Copy link
Contributor

merge
(@santocch please have a look)

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit 8d9690a into cms-sw:CMSSW_11_0_X Feb 4, 2020
@santocch
Copy link

+1

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_11_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_11_1_X is complete. This pull request will be automatically merged.

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.

7 participants