 |
 |
Here it is: https://userweb.jlab.org/~baltzell/.tmp/x.txt <https://userweb.jlab.org/~baltzell/.tmp/x.txt> -Nathan > On Dec 8, 2021, at 11:15 AM, Bravo, Cameron B. <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Hello, > > I never saw a run list from Norman. Can you forward that info so the collaboration has access to it? > > Thanks, > Cameron > From: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Nathan Baltzell <[log in to unmask]> > Sent: Tuesday, December 7, 2021 7:03 PM > To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>; hps-software <[log in to unmask]> > Subject: Re: [Hps-analysis] 2021 trigger skims > > Hello All, > > After some further preparations, the 2021 trigger skims are launched. > > Outputs will be going to /cache/hallb/hps/physrun2021/production/evio-skims. > > I broke the run list from Norman into 5 lists, and started with the first 20% in one batch, all submitted. I'll proceed to the other 4 batches over the holidays, assessing tape usage as we go. > > -Nathan > > > On Nov 29, 2021, at 3:39 PM, Nathan Baltzell <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > > The 10x larger test is done at /volatile/hallb/hps/baltzell/trigtest3 > > > > -Nathan > > > > > >> On Nov 29, 2021, at 2:52 PM, Nathan Baltzell <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> > >> Hello All, > >> > >> Before running over the entire 2021 data set, I ran some test jobs using Maurik’s EVIO trigger bit skimmer. Here’s the fraction of events kept in 14750 for each skim: > >> > >> fee 2.0% > >> moll 3.3% > >> muon 1.9% > >> rndm 2.9% > >> > >> In each case, it’s inclusive of all such types, e.g., moll=moll+moll_pde+moll_pair, rndm=fcup+pulser. > >> > >> Are those numbers in line with expectations? The total is 10% and not a problem if these skims are expected to be useful. The outputs are at /volatile/hallb/hps/baltzell/trigtest2 if people are interested to check things. > >> > >> A 10x larger test is running now and going to /volatile/hallb/hps/baltzell/trigtest3 and should be done in the next couple hours. > >> > >> ************ > >> > >> Note, it would be prudent to do this *only* for production runs, those that would be used in physics analysis, to avoid unnecessary tape access. By that I mean removing junk runs, keeping only those with some significant number of events, and only keeping those with physics trigger settings (not special runs). For that we need a run list. I think we have close to a PB, but I remember hearing at the collaboration meeting that at least 20% is not useful for the porpoises of trigger bit skimming. > >> > >> -Nathan_______________________________________________ > >> Hps-analysis mailing list > >> [log in to unmask] > >> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis <https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/hps-analysis> > > > > > ######################################################################## > 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 <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__listserv.slac.stanford.edu_cgi-2Dbin_wa-3FSUBED1-3DHPS-2DSOFTWARE-26A-3D1&d=DwMF-g&c=CJqEzB1piLOyyvZjb8YUQw&r=HLszBssMDrxg1suTls0aX2y52oDK_fWrLNLTgw_5saE&m=w73GiS4BL7KeYy9evAuVAXjRWWZlbLCqOPcIFDaPbFQUMSVhMLBc7njIqBYWupAo&s=f-4orMSAw1m9x7bfLT-VQAJZrOPDvFEWd5GCFy3PnKU&e=> ######################################################################## 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