Central skims for 2018 PbPb run #24927
Conversation
|
The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-24927/6900 |
|
A new Pull Request was created by @mandrenguyen (Matthew Nguyen) for master. It involves the following packages: Configuration/Skimming @cmsbuild, @prebello, @zhenhu, @pgunnell, @franzoni, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
|
@mandrenguyen do we really need to drop old stuff, would not be an era-based approach possible? |
|
@fabiocos I don't really see the motivation for keeping the 2016 pA central skims around. We won't have more pA data until midway through Run 3 at earliest. Even then we would likely not reuse the same skimming configurations. I can bring those old cffs back if you prefer. However, I would not bother with trying to control which prompt skims are run based on an era. AFAIK central skims are implemented directly in the T0 configuration. |
|
@prebello @zhenhu @davidlange6 do we have a general policy for maintaining older skims? |
|
My 2 cents
a) we should maintain skims that are not obsolete (skims likely needed in run3 are not obsolete)
b) skims should not be controlled by era rather by cmsDriver command.
… On Oct 26, 2018, at 10:33 AM, Fabio Cossutti ***@***.***> wrote:
@prebello @zhenhu @davidlange6 do we have a general policy for maintaining older skims?
At present there is nothing in the release for PbPb as far as I can see, and the pA skims of 5_3_X had gone since a while
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
|
|
Hi @fabiocos about Skims, @kfjack has contacted HIN group after PdmV request to get the necessary inputs and can give more details. Please, @mandrenguyen @kkrajczar could you comment on the thread "status SKIM matrix for HI"? |
|
@prebello Please note that @kkrajczar is no longer in CMS Regarding maintaining older skims, the 2016 pA skims will not be reused in Run 3. |
|
please test workflow 140.56,140.57 |
|
The tests are being triggered in jenkins. |
|
Comparison job queued. |
|
+1 tests approved |
|
Comparison is ready @slava77 comparisons for the following workflows were not done due to missing matrix map:
Comparison Summary:
|
|
+operations the update of the StandardSequences is coherent with the PR purpose |
cmsbuild
added
fully-signed
operations-approved
and removed
operations-pending
pending-signatures
labels
|
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. @davidlange6, @slava77, @smuzaffar, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2) |
|
+1 |
|
@mandrenguyen in my check I missed that 140.54 is using the PA skim, apologies for this. As PA sequences do not harm, I will restore them, although I think that this workflow has mostly a technical use. |
|
@fabiocos Ok, thank you |
Replace central skim cffs from 2016 pPb with ones for this year's 2018 PbPb run.
These will only be testable once the HLT menu is integrated, which should be soon.