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

Minimal era for Run 3 PbPb and corresponding relVal workflows #29032

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Mar 12, 2020

Conversation

mandrenguyen
Copy link
Contributor

@mandrenguyen mandrenguyen commented Feb 25, 2020

PR description:

Adds Run3_PbPb to run PbPb reconstruction with 2021 conditions. This era contains the minimal modifications to produce a running workflow. It uses the same modifiers as in the Run2_2018_pp_on_AA era. Also adding 2021 heavy-ion MC relval workflows by copying the corresponding 2018 ones.

PR validation:

Tested locally with the new relval workflow 159.1, after adding PR #29078 by hand.

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

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

The code-checks are being triggered in jenkins.

@mandrenguyen
Copy link
Contributor Author

@abaty

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+code-checks

Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-29032/13896

  • This PR adds an extra 36KB to repository

  • There are other open Pull requests which might conflict with changes you have proposed:

    • File Configuration/StandardSequences/python/Eras.py modified in PR(s): Mydev #29030

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

A new Pull Request was created by @mandrenguyen (Matthew Nguyen) for master.

It involves the following packages:

Configuration/Eras
Configuration/StandardSequences
RecoTracker/IterativeTracking

@perrotta, @silviodonato, @cmsbuild, @franzoni, @slava77, @fabiocos, @davidlange6 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks.
@makortel, @felicepantaleo, @GiacomoSguazzoni, @rovere, @VinInn, @Martin-Grunewald, @mschrode, @lecriste, @gpetruc, @ebrondol, @dgulhan 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

@boudoul
Copy link
Contributor

boudoul commented Feb 25, 2020

Great , thanks @mandrenguyen ! Presumably we should define a workflow using it, do you want me to take care ?

@mandrenguyen
Copy link
Contributor Author

@boudoul I can setup a relval workflow. Let's get some feedback first on this proposal for an era from @slava77 @perrotta

@boudoul
Copy link
Contributor

boudoul commented Feb 25, 2020

Perfect, thank you

Copy link
Contributor

@slava77 slava77 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

except it removes the HI-specific track MVA calibrations, which do not yet exist in a 2021 global tag

why do they not exist for the 2021 GT?
IIRC, the regular tracking selectors are the same in 2021 as in 2018.
Did I miss some essential tracking changes that would invalidate HIMVASelector[s]?

Configuration/Eras/python/Era_Run3_PbPb_cff.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@mandrenguyen
Copy link
Contributor Author

except it removes the HI-specific track MVA calibrations, which do not yet exist in a 2021 global tag

why do they not exist for the 2021 GT?
IIRC, the regular tracking selectors are the same in 2021 as in 2018.
Did I miss some essential tracking changes that would invalidate HIMVASelector[s]?

In my tests I have used the standard pp GT (and corresponding beamspot) in my tests. A crash in reco indicated to me that they do not appear to contain this record. I assume there is not matching GT/beamspot set yet for heavy-ion beam conditions. I don't believe there's anything fundamental. One could simply add these records to the pp GTs as well. Of course the selection has to be retrained for Run 3 in any case.

@slava77
Copy link
Contributor

slava77 commented Feb 25, 2020

One could simply add these records to the pp GTs as well.

I prefer this solution; it seems more appropriate for the current state of the physics performance setup.

@mandrenguyen
Copy link
Contributor Author

@abaty Can you upload the HIMVA tags into the GT queue for 2021 realistic conditions, please?

@abaty
Copy link
Contributor

abaty commented Feb 26, 2020

@mandrenguyen I've asked Xiao Wang to upload the relevant tags to the GT queue.

@tocheng
Copy link
Contributor

tocheng commented Feb 27, 2020

I prefer to have a separate GT for heavy Ion MC. AlCa can make a heavy Ion queue for 2021 based on pp and heavy Ion group can queue tags to add new conditions or replace conditions in pp GT.

@mandrenguyen
Copy link
Contributor Author

@tocheng Is there a reason not to add this record to the pp GT? We may want to test the HI era with various pp GTs in the future. In any case, this is fine for us if @slava77 agrees. What would be the ETA to produce a HI GT that is the same as the one pointed to by auto:phase1_2021_realistic, except that it has the add'l HIMVA records?

@tocheng
Copy link
Contributor

tocheng commented Feb 27, 2020

@mandrenguyen What do you mean various pp GTs?
We could make a new queue based on pp 2021 and you can add the missing tracker selector. The HI GT can be made soon after.

@mandrenguyen
Copy link
Contributor Author

mandrenguyen commented Feb 27, 2020

@tocheng I just meant that adding this record to pp GTs would allow us to run PbPb_run3 era with pp GTs without crashing. That sounds like something that could come in handy to me. I think we can drop this discussion though. We will need the HI queue anyway, since there will eventually be beamspot tag to upload there. Let's just get this era operational. Once a HI GT is available I can update the autocond, and add a relval wf.

@tocheng
Copy link
Contributor

tocheng commented Feb 27, 2020

111X_mcRun3_2021_realistic_HI_Queue is ready and is equal to auto:phase1_2021
https://cms-conddb.cern.ch/cmsDbBrowser/diff/Prod/gts/111X_mcRun3_2021_realistic_HI_Queue/110X_mcRun3_2021_realistic_v8

@Taburis
Copy link

Taburis commented Feb 27, 2020

Hi @tocheng, @mandrenguyen, and @slava77, the MVA tags added to the queue: 111X_mcRun3_2021_realistic_HI_Queue.

@cmsbuild
Copy link
Contributor

+1
Tested at: 7370e65
https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-3e9604/5116/summary.html
CMSSW: CMSSW_11_1_X_2020-03-10-1100
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-3e9604/5116/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/data/PR-3e9604/159.0_HydjetQ_B12_5020GeV_2021_ppReco+HydjetQ_B12_5020GeV_2021_ppReco+DIGIHI2021PPRECO+RECOHI2021PPRECO+ALCARECOHI2021PPRECO+HARVESTHI2021PPRECO
  • /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-3e9604/159.1_QCD_Pt_80_120_14_HI_2021+QCD_Pt_80_120_14_HI_2021+DIGIHI2021PPRECO+RECOHI2021PPRECO+HARVESTHI2021PPRECO
  • /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-3e9604/159.2_PhotonJets_Pt_10_14_HI_2021+PhotonJets_Pt_10_14_HI_2021+DIGIHI2021PPRECO+RECOHI2021PPRECO+HARVESTHI2021PPRECO
  • /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-3e9604/159.3_ZMM_14_HI_2021+ZMM_14_HI_2021+DIGIHI2021PPRECO+RECOHI2021PPRECO+HARVESTHI2021PPRECO
  • /data/cmsbld/jenkins/workspace/compare-root-files-short-matrix/data/PR-3e9604/159.4_ZEE_14_HI_2021+ZEE_14_HI_2021+DIGIHI2021PPRECO+RECOHI2021PPRECO+HARVESTHI2021PPRECO

Comparison Summary:

  • No significant changes to the logs found
  • Reco comparison results: 4 differences found in the comparisons
  • DQMHistoTests: Total files compared: 34
  • DQMHistoTests: Total histograms compared: 2680577
  • DQMHistoTests: Total failures: 2
  • DQMHistoTests: Total nulls: 0
  • DQMHistoTests: Total successes: 2680256
  • DQMHistoTests: Total skipped: 319
  • DQMHistoTests: Total Missing objects: 0
  • DQMHistoSizes: Histogram memory added: 0.0 KiB( 33 files compared)
  • Checked 147 log files, 16 edm output root files, 34 DQM output files

@chayanit
Copy link

+1

@silviodonato
Copy link
Contributor

+operations

@kpedro88
Copy link
Contributor

+upgrade

@silviodonato
Copy link
Contributor

Kind reminder for generators: @alberto-sanchez @agrohsje @efeyazgan @mkirsano @qliphy @SiewYan

@qliphy
Copy link
Contributor

qliphy commented Mar 12, 2020

+1

@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. @davidlange6, @silviodonato, @fabiocos (and backports should be raised in the release meeting by the corresponding L2)

@silviodonato
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.