-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
[13_0_X backport ] Fall17V2 photon IDs and Isolations saved only in Run2 Nanos #42717
[13_0_X backport ] Fall17V2 photon IDs and Isolations saved only in Run2 Nanos #42717
Conversation
A new Pull Request was created by @Prasant1993 (Prasant Kumar Rout) for CMSSW_13_0_X. It involves the following packages:
@cmsbuild, @simonepigazzini, @vlimant can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
enable nano |
please test |
-1 Failed Tests: UnitTests RelVals-INPUT Unit TestsI found 1 errors in the following unit tests: ---> test test-das-selected-lumis had ERRORS RelVals-INPUT
Expand to see more relval errors ...
Comparison SummarySummary:
NANO Comparison SummarySummary:
Nano size comparison Summary:
|
please test |
@Prasant1993 what is your time scale for the electron PR? we would like to launch a NANO production very soon and would like to finalize the release for that this week. Thank you |
btw, http://tinyurl.com/2xkm4m6g some of the added variables are empty. Chiefly "hasConvertionTracks" |
Hi @simonepigazzini, yes I will do the electron PR by doing the necessary changes as photons by tomorrow. |
Thanks for pointing this out. The name of this DQM histogram is not correctly saved. It is currently saved as "hasConversionTrackTracks". The Fall17V2 DQM histograms are not being filled up, as the variable name is not there now as we have same name for both Run2 and Run3. Can you suggest what should we do for Run2 ID and isolation variables in DQM histograms ? |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-593f40/34607/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
NANO Comparison SummarySummary:
Nano size comparison Summary:
|
Pull request #42717 was updated. @cmsbuild, @simonepigazzini, @vlimant can you please check and sign again. |
please test |
Hi @Prasant1993 thanks for fixing this issue. My bad, it was an oversight. Sorry! |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-593f40/34613/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
NANO Comparison SummarySummary:
Nano size comparison Summary:
|
+1 |
This pull request is fully signed and it will be integrated in one of the next CMSSW_13_0_X IBs (tests are also fine) and once validation in the development release cycle CMSSW_13_3_X is complete. This pull request will now be reviewed by the release team before it's merged. @rappoccio, @antoniovilela, @sextonkennedy (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
+1 |
PR description:
Backport of PR #42255 (Add 4 Isolation variables for Photon to NanoAOD) and #42247 (Add hasConversionTracks to nano). See description there.
PR validation:
Same as #42255
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:
Backport required for processing of 2022 and 2023 data/MC which will happen in 13_0_X.