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

Replace Geometry_cff with GeometryDB_cff in RecoJets #38784

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 26, 2022

Conversation

jeongeun
Copy link
Contributor

PR description:
Review on the Reco part of #31113

process.load("Configuration.StandardSequences.Geometry_cff")
was outdated #8810
It should be replaced with
process.load("Configuration.StandardSequences.GeometryDB_cff")

In this PR, RecoJets configuration files (4 files) are fixed.

modified:   RecoJets/JetAnalyzers/test/JetIdExample.py
modified:   RecoJets/JetAssociationProducers/test/pileupJetAnalysis_cfg.py
modified:   RecoJets/JetAssociationProducers/test/test_extrapolation_cff.py
modified:   RecoJets/JetProducers/test/runSubjetFilter_cfg.py

PR validation:

Tested in CMSSW_12_5_X, the basic test all passed in the CMSSW PR instructions

Verified

This commit was created on GitHub.com and signed with GitHub’s verified signature.
@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-38784/31134

  • This PR adds an extra 16KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @jeongeun (JeongEun Lee) for master.

It involves the following packages:

  • RecoJets/JetAnalyzers (reconstruction)
  • RecoJets/JetAssociationProducers (reconstruction)
  • RecoJets/JetProducers (reconstruction)

@jpata, @cmsbuild, @clacaputo can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@AlexDeMoor, @rappoccio, @jdolen, @yslai, @emilbols, @jdamgov, @ahinzmann, @nhanvtran, @JyothsnaKomaragiri, @gkasieczka, @clelange, @schoef, @andrzejnovak, @demuller, @mariadalfonso, @seemasharmafnal this is something you requested to watch as well.
@perrotta, @dpiparo, @qliphy, @rappoccio you are the release manager for this.

cms-bot commands are listed here

@clacaputo
Copy link
Contributor

@cmsbuild please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-aeabb4/26328/summary.html
COMMIT: 4ccfff3
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_5_X_2022-07-19-1100/el8_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/38784/26328/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 2 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 50
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3662417
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 8
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3662387
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 49 files compared)
  • Checked 208 log files, 45 edm output root files, 50 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@@ -42,7 +42,7 @@

process = cms.Process("Ana")
process.load('Configuration.StandardSequences.FrontierConditions_GlobalTag_cff')
process.load("Configuration.StandardSequences.Geometry_cff")
process.load("Configuration.StandardSequences.GeometryDB_cff")
process.GlobalTag.globaltag = GLOBAL_TAG
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @jeongeun GLOBAL_TAG is initialized with old GT; moreover, the input files used are from 2010.
Did you try to run it? Maybe we can directly remove this?

@cms-sw/jetmet-pog-l2 , what do you think?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @cms-sw/jetmet-pog-l2 , any thoughts about it?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @laurenhay could you please check whether these cfgs are still needed by jme people? Thanks

@jpata
Copy link
Contributor

jpata commented Aug 24, 2022

kind ping @cms-sw/jetmet-pog-l2 @laurenhay

@kdlong
Copy link
Contributor

kdlong commented Aug 24, 2022

@jpata is this for us or for JME?

@jpata
Copy link
Contributor

jpata commented Aug 24, 2022

sorry it was for @cms-sw/jetmet-pog-l2 (Lauren is on double duty and I got confused).

@laurenhay
Copy link
Contributor

laurenhay commented Aug 24, 2022

@joosep Thanks for the ping! From what I can see I think for sure RecoJets/JetAnalyzers/test/JetIdExample.py is not in use since it loads processors that were removed in PR #19406.
Likely we can remove it or should at least update it. Waiting for feedback on the other files.

@smuzaffar smuzaffar modified the milestones: CMSSW_12_5_X, CMSSW_12_6_X Aug 28, 2022
@clacaputo
Copy link
Contributor

@joosep Thanks for the ping! From what I can see I think for sure RecoJets/JetAnalyzers/test/JetIdExample.py is not in use since it loads processors that were removed in PR #19406. Likely we can remove it or should at least update it. Waiting for feedback on the other files.

Hi @laurenhay , any update on the other files? Thanks

@clacaputo
Copy link
Contributor

A kindly ping to @laurenhay

@laurenhay
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @clacaputo sorry for the delay I think the consensus is they can go.
I asked the current JME conveners (a couple times) and there were no complaints at deleting or requests to keep them.
Also asked @rappoccio and he said they can go.

@clacaputo
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @clacaputo sorry for the delay I think the consensus is they can go. I asked the current JME conveners (a couple times) and there were no complaints at deleting or requests to keep them. Also asked @rappoccio and he said they can go.

Thanks for checking. @jeongeun could you please remove them?

@alkaloge
Copy link
Contributor

alkaloge commented Oct 5, 2022

sorry for replying late - JME has no objections

@clacaputo
Copy link
Contributor

Kindly ping @jeongeun

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #38784 was updated. @cmsbuild, @mandrenguyen, @clacaputo can you please check and sign again.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-38784/32744

  • This PR adds an extra 20KB to repository

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request #38784 was updated. @cmsbuild, @mandrenguyen, @clacaputo can you please check and sign again.

@mandrenguyen
Copy link
Contributor

please test

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1

Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-aeabb4/28513/summary.html
COMMIT: 2c1adce
CMSSW: CMSSW_12_6_X_2022-10-25-2300/el8_amd64_gcc10
User test area: For local testing, you can use /cvmfs/cms-ci.cern.ch/week0/cms-sw/cmssw/38784/28513/install.sh to create a dev area with all the needed externals and cmssw changes.

Comparison Summary

There are some workflows for which there are errors in the baseline:
20834.911 step 3
4.6 step 3
The results for the comparisons for these workflows could be incomplete
This means most likely that the IB is having errors in the relvals.The error does NOT come from this pull request

Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 15 differences found in the comparisons
  • Reco comparison had 6 failed jobs
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 48
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 3384029
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 99
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 3383908
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 22
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 47 files compared)
  • Checked 201 log files, 48 edm output root files, 48 DQM output files
  • TriggerResults: no differences found

@clacaputo
Copy link
Contributor

There are some differences in JetMET folder of DMQ bin-by-bin comparison for wf 20900 [1] (and also other wfs) that shouldn't be there given the PR's nature. Any idea @cms-sw/jetmet-pog-l2 ?

[1] https://tinyurl.com/2c82kenn

@clacaputo
Copy link
Contributor

There are some differences in JetMET folder of DMQ bin-by-bin comparison for wf 20900 [1] (and also other wfs) that shouldn't be there given the PR's nature. Any idea @cms-sw/jetmet-pog-l2 ?

[1] https://tinyurl.com/2c82kenn

Update: it seems to be a widespread issue

@clacaputo
Copy link
Contributor

clacaputo commented Oct 26, 2022

+reconstruction

  • technical PR: removing some unused code
  • changes observed are not related to the PR

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

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)

@perrotta
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.

None yet

10 participants