-
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
Adding SiPixel on track charge and shape probs to MiniAOD content #36247
Conversation
-code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36247/26887
Code check has found code style and quality issues which could be resolved by applying following patch(s)
|
in case it was not noticed already |
e3d255f
to
77a80d9
Compare
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36247/26904
|
A new Pull Request was created by @tvami (Tamas Vami) for master. It involves the following packages:
@jpata, @cmsbuild, @slava77 can you please review it and eventually sign? Thanks. cms-bot commands are listed here |
77a80d9
to
c9dc302
Compare
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36247/26906
|
@cmsbuild , please test |
@smuzaffar tests have not come back in 24 hours, should re-trigger them? |
looks like the profiling job is failing [a] , so re-triggering the test is not going to help. [a]
|
to solve this, PR #36477 is needed (see also #36347 (comment)) |
@cmsbuild , please abort |
2001fee
to
ddde69d
Compare
ddde69d
to
75b2f0e
Compare
+code-checks Logs: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/code-checks/cms-sw-PR-36247/27386
|
Pull request #36247 was updated. @perrotta, @gouskos, @clacaputo, @fabiocos, @cmsbuild, @fgolf, @slava77, @jpata, @mariadalfonso, @qliphy, @davidlange6 can you please check and sign again. |
+1 Summary: https://cmssdt.cern.ch/SDT/jenkins-artifacts/pull-request-integration/PR-ecf9e7/21289/summary.html Comparison SummarySummary:
|
The idea from Slava to use the DeDxHitInfo's clusters and an approximation for the angles seems to be giving compatible results with my proposed solution. I'm removing the |
I'm closing this PR too, I'll open up a new one that will only contain the producer, maybe that actually could be attached to the skim development as well! |
PR description:
See request to ReRECO 2017/2018 SM and MET data in [1]. This assumed refitting tracks to get the required low-level pixel reco information. As an alternative (actually it's an improvement, so better than alternative) it was recommended to save the required information in the MiniAOD. This PR does that, i.e. adds SiPixel on track charge and shape probs to MiniAOD content. Since in 2017/2018 the Pixel layer 1 was very noisy, and alternative version that excludes L1 was added as well.
siPixelTrackProbQXY
:Further details presented in the Tracking POG meeting on Monday [2]
[1] https://its.cern.ch/jira/browse/PDMVRERECO-48
[2] https://indico.cern.ch/event/1098365/#5-proposal-to-use-low-level-pi
PR validation:
before the PR and after the PR the sizes change as follows:
-rw-r--r-- 1 tvami cms 8177333 Nov 24 16:30 ReRECO_RAW2DIGI_L1Reco_RECO_EI_PAT.root
-->
-rw-r--r-- 1 tvami cms 8185759 Nov 24 16:26 ReRECO_RAW2DIGI_L1Reco_RECO_EI_PAT.root
i.e an 1.00103041 increase in size is expected.
A unit test has been implemented as well
before the PR and after the PR the sizes of the AOD change as follows:
-rw-r--r--. 1 tvami zh 46456023 Dec 6 22:24 AOD.root
-->
-rw-r--r--. 1 tvami zh 47673431 Dec 6 22:23 AOD.root
i.e an 1.0262056 increase in size is expected.
Here is the timing report for before the PR
and after the PR
Content was validated on MC Signal samples, and on data as well, please see more plots in [2]
if this PR is a backport please specify the original PR and why you need to backport that PR:
Needs a backport in 10_6_X
cc @mmusich