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

Change quality criteria for some supercrystals in the Ecal Endcaps for LED Quality plots [CMSSW_12_2_X] #37380

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 1, 2022

Conversation

abhih1
Copy link
Contributor

@abhih1 abhih1 commented Mar 28, 2022

PR description:

This PR is done to modify the quality criteria of a few Supercrystals/Towers in DQM LED quality plots of the ECAL Endcaps. This set of supercrystals are known to be problematic by the ECAL LED experts and are being monitored. However it does not affect the quality of physics data and so in order to avoid the DQM displaying them as BAD constantly the quality criteria for them are being changed. The list of supercrystals tower ids are stored in the data file SClist.dat

PR validation:

This PR was validated by running the Standard Ecal calibration workflow on a test run and observing the DQM output file on an offline DQM test gui to confirm the code changes work as expected. The plots were also approved by the ECAL LED expert.
The PR was also validated by running the DQM relval workflow 136.874 using the runTheMatrix script
runTheMatrix.py -l 136.874 --ibeos

This PR is a backport of #37378 to have the changes available in CMSSW_12_2_X used in production at the moment.

@abhih1 abhih1 changed the title Change quality criteria for some supercrystals in the Ecal Endcaps for LED Quality plots s [CMSSW_12_2_X] Change quality criteria for some supercrystals in the Ecal Endcaps for LED Quality plots [CMSSW_12_2_X] Mar 28, 2022
@cmsbuild cmsbuild added this to the CMSSW_12_2_X milestone Mar 28, 2022
@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

cmsbuild commented Mar 28, 2022

A new Pull Request was created by @abhih1 (Abhirami Harilal) for CMSSW_12_2_X.

It involves the following packages:

  • DQM/EcalMonitorClient (dqm)

@emanueleusai, @ahmad3213, @cmsbuild, @jfernan2, @pmandrik, @pbo0, @rvenditti can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@rchatter, @simonepigazzini, @thomreis, @argiro this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

backport of #37378

@perrotta
Copy link
Contributor

@abhih1 if you want to backport in 12_2_X, please also prepare a backport for the intermediate cycle 12_3_X, which will be used in production next

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

please test with cms-data/DQM-EcalMonitorClient#2

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-7cbd74/23484/summary.html
COMMIT: 5ad30d2
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_2_X_2022-03-28-2300/slc7_amd64_gcc900
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/37380/23484/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

The following merge commits were also included on top of IB + this PR after doing git cms-merge-topic:

You can see more details here:
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-7cbd74/23484/git-recent-commits.json
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-7cbd74/23484/git-merge-result

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 2 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 42
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3251324
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 5
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 1
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3251296
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.004 KiB( 41 files compared)
  • DQMHistoSizes: changed ( 312.0 ): 0.004 KiB MessageLogger/Warnings
  • Checked 177 log files, 37 edm output root files, 42 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@jfernan2
Copy link
Contributor

+1
Tested in Online DQM at P5

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_12_2_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_12_4_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@abhih1
Copy link
Contributor Author

abhih1 commented Mar 29, 2022

Thanks @perrotta. I have made a backport PR #37404 to 12_3_X.

@abhih1 if you want to backport in 12_2_X, please also prepare a backport for the intermediate cycle 12_3_X, which will be used in production next

@qliphy
Copy link
Contributor

qliphy commented Apr 1, 2022

+1

@cmsbuild cmsbuild merged commit 29b9889 into cms-sw:CMSSW_12_2_X Apr 1, 2022
@perrotta perrotta mentioned this pull request Apr 1, 2022
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.

5 participants