Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Add new Replay Configuration for Run1 scale tests #4145

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
hufnagel merged 1 commit into from
Jun 12, 2015
Merged

Add new Replay Configuration for Run1 scale tests #4145

hufnagel merged 1 commit into from
Jun 12, 2015

Conversation

@lucacopa
Copy link
Contributor

@lucacopa lucacopa commented Jun 10, 2015

  • Added ReplayOfflineConfigurationRun1: No alca producers or specific dqm sequences.
  • ReplayOfflineConfiguration.py was updated according the current produciton tier0 config.
  • Fix space in ProdOfflineConfiguration

@lucacopa
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucacopa commented Jun 10, 2015

@hufnagel please don't merge yet, I have to cross check with DAS too

@hufnagel
Copy link
Member

hufnagel commented Jun 10, 2015

A few comments:

  • Run1 replay config does not need Run2 scenarios or Run2 repack/express overrides
  • Run2 replay config does not need Run1 scenarios or Run1 repack/express overrides
  • Run2 prod and replay config should remove dqm_sequences from everything but SingleMu
    (SingleMu is the only one we got a confirmation for what we use)
  • Run2 replay config dropped the write_miniaod statements, they should stay
    (both the default False and the individual overrides for some datasets)

The dropping of dqm_sequences from the prod config should also be done for what we run in prod. I think all datasets affected are not in the current HLT menus, but we should still do it.

@lucacopa lucacopa force-pushed the replayConfigs_run1_2 branch 3 times, most recently from b57899b to f553cf7 Compare June 10, 2015 18:08
@lucacopa
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucacopa commented Jun 10, 2015

I updated the configs according to your comments, please have a look. Also, I checked the parked PDs, they are all included.

@hufnagel
Copy link
Member

hufnagel commented Jun 10, 2015

Looks good ! One minor change, change the Express GT to GR_E_V49 (once my replay testing it finishes). Then I would propose we do a couple quick replays of a short Run1 run and a short Run2 run to confirm the configs are functional and then we merge it.

@hufnagel
Copy link
Member

hufnagel commented Jun 10, 2015

Express with GR_E_V49 has been validated, works fine. PCL is functional now even for older runs.

@lucacopa lucacopa force-pushed the replayConfigs_run1_2 branch from f553cf7 to b9bd645 Compare June 10, 2015 20:58
@lucacopa
Copy link
Contributor Author

lucacopa commented Jun 10, 2015

ok, I updated the prod config with the latest release too. I will run a short test to confirm that the replay configs are ok too.

@lucacopa lucacopa force-pushed the replayConfigs_run1_2 branch 4 times, most recently from 81ce221 to 581adef Compare June 12, 2015 19:09
@lucacopa
Add new Replay Configuration for Run1 scale tests
f1cc687 
- Added ReplayOfflineConfigurationRun1: No alca producers or specific dqm sequences.
- ReplayOfflineConfiguration.py was updated according the current produciton tier0 config.
- Fix identations in ProdOfflineConfiguration
- Add low PU datasets in ProdOfflineConfiguration
- Add special Totem runs config in the ProdOfflineConfiguration
- Release update to CMSSW_7_4_5
- Express GT updated to GR_E_V49
@lucacopa lucacopa force-pushed the replayConfigs_run1_2 branch from 581adef to f1cc687 Compare June 12, 2015 19:11
hufnagel added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 12, 2015
@hufnagel
Merge pull request #4145 from lucacopa/replayConfigs_run1_2
3e07351 
Add new Replay Configuration for Run1 scale tests
@hufnagel hufnagel merged commit 3e07351 into dmwm:master Jun 12, 2015
@lucacopa lucacopa deleted the replayConfigs_run1_2 branch June 12, 2015 19:53
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

No reviews

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@lucacopa @hufnagel