Strictly speaking, things like target, magnets, etc. are what we call "beamline" which I think is why Stepan assumed you meant those things by "beam".  I don't see the need to have a separate category for actual beam parameters (current, position, etc.)

I would call them all "beamline" and be done with it.

Tim

On Sep 9, 2013, at 1:51 PM, "McCormick, Jeremy I." <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I added a "Hall" heading which would have conditions for magnets, target, etc.
> 
> The "Beam" category can be used strictly for the beam conditions.
> 
> --Jeremy
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of McCormick, Jeremy I.
> Sent: Monday, September 09, 2013 1:46 PM
> To: Stepan Stepanyan
> Cc: Maurik Holtrop; hps-software; Dupré Raphaël
> Subject: RE: conditions discussion page
> 
> Hi, Stepan.
> 
>> Another question, you have "format" for SVT and ECal, I assume we should fix them too and add other parameters if needed. 
>> For example for ECal we will have timing information, gain of channels etc..
> 
> The fields in the brief format descriptions are actually the ones currently being used in our lcsim reconstruction software.  Indeed, similar fields for the ECal should be fully described as well.  I didn't have any information on it!  More input from experts probably needed here.
> 
>> As for magnets and other stuff, we need field settings (currents) for chicane magnets (the analyzing magnet is important).
> 
> I would put this under "Machine", or it Could be a separate "Magnets" category.
> 
>> We will have hall probes as well as currents in EPICS. 
> 
> Perhaps under "Machine" again or should it be separate?
> 
>> As for motors, we will need to know where the target is, but also where the SVT positions are (motor settings). 
> 
> I would put the SVT positions in the tracker conditions.  Target could be a separate category.
> 
>> All these have nothing to do with machine. These are HPS setup conditions and we have to have them, under some header.
> 
> Okay, as I stated, organizationally this page will be fluid and is being updated.  Change it as you wish.
> 
> --Jeremy
> 
> On 9/6/13 5:43 PM, McCormick, Jeremy I. wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I'm CC'ing the software list, so others can give input.
>> 
>> Thanks for the feedback, Stepan.  I agree that what I put on the Wiki page was incomplete.  I have added headers for "Trigger" and "DAQ" now, but I honestly have no idea at all what types of conditions would be stored for those sub-systems.  Can you give me some idea?
>> 
>> If you have right access to that page (should get a Confluence account if you don't already have one), then you may edit the page contents directly to add more details.
>> 
>> Yes, I think there's some terminology issues here.  I consider calibrations as a type of detector condition.  Likely, we will store this information in the same database.  Stored information of slow and fast control systems is also something I'd consider a type of condition.
>> 
>> "I assume your Beam includes magnets, targets, and other slow control parameters such as temperatures, pressures etc."
>> 
>> This comment is interesting.  Can you give me some idea here of what 
>> information you'd like to store related to magnet, target, etc. ?
>> Should there be a conceptual separation between the actual Beam 
>> conditions and what you mentioned?  (e.g. "Beam" vs "Machine"
>> conditions)
>> 
>> ________________________________________
>> From: Stepan Stepanyan [[log in to unmask]]
>> Sent: Friday, September 06, 2013 4:50 AM
>> To: McCormick, Jeremy I.; Maurik Holtrop
>> Subject: Re: conditions discussion page
>> 
>> Hello Jeremy,
>> 
>> Thanks for organizing the discussion and for the web page.
>> I finally understood what you guys meant by "conditions".
>> My comments really were limited to the last point only.
>> In our world we call rest as calibration DB and I was confused with 
>> the language.
>> 
>> Now more constrictive comments - I think we should add to your list 
>> DAQ and Trigger. Each will have their conditions for each run (or 
>> groups of runs). Of course at some the muon system should be added to 
>> the list as well. I assume your "Beam"
>> includes magnets, targets, and other slow control parameters such as 
>> temperatures, pressures etc.
>> 
>> Regards, Stepan
>> 
>> On 9/5/13 5:56 PM, McCormick, Jeremy I. wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> I added a page for gathering resources about HPS conditions and discussing this topic:
>> 
>> https://confluence.slac.stanford.edu/display/hpsg/Conditions+Discussio
>> n
>> 
>> The link to "Online Software Discussion" is a talk I gave at our last 
>> collaboration meeting.  The relevant slide numbers are 3-9.  (Rest is 
>> about monitoring.)
>> 
>> Feel free to add comments to this page as well as add additional bullet points, sections, etc.
>> 
>> --Jeremy
>> 
>> ________________________________
>> 
>> Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list
>> 
>> To unsubscribe from the HPS-SOFTWARE list, click the following link:
>> https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=HPS-SOFTWARE&A=1
>> 
> 
> ########################################################################
> Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list
> 
> To unsubscribe from the HPS-SOFTWARE list, click the following link:
> https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=HPS-SOFTWARE&A=1
> 
> ########################################################################
> Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list
> 
> To unsubscribe from the HPS-SOFTWARE list, click the following link:
> https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=HPS-SOFTWARE&A=1

########################################################################
Use REPLY-ALL to reply to list

To unsubscribe from the HPS-SOFTWARE list, click the following link:
https://listserv.slac.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=HPS-SOFTWARE&A=1