Print

Print


Hi Tim,

thanks, and apologies for not googling things before asking.

> Yes, certainly, it is practical.  LCIO was long ago settled on as the EDM for HPS and the LCIO output will be the raw output format of the experiment. Like any persistency framework, we can decide exactly what parts of the events we can afford to output to tape.  That content has not yet been settled. There are some things that for whatever reason haven't been persisted as LCIO objects in the past (but should be) and there are other things we have been writing to the events that won't be feasible to keep when we have large volumes of data.

Should we have this discussion with some concrete numbers for what the event sizes are going to be then and what computing / storage resources
are going to be available at which sites?

> One could make an LCIO micro-DST also, but it seems the desire is to convert to ROOT at the point of slimming the data for analysis.

Oh, I'm all for it, but there is also value in being able to run the same or similar code on DST or micro-DST…
It's also would be great to define what is meant by "analysis" here - 
is alignment analysis? ECAL calibration? Development of electron ID?
Do you foresee that it is all done in DST, or you have a separate calibration stream?

Again, sorry,  I'm just trying to come up to speed with the computing model, 
may be I can google those kind of questions as well…

thanks,
-y

--------------------------
Prof. Yuri Gershtein
[log in to unmask]
http://physics.rutgers.edu/~gershtein
(732)445-5500 x1794
W316 Serin Building
Department of Physics and Astronomy
136 Frelinghuysen Rd
Rutgers University
Piscataway, NJ 08854


########################################################################
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