Skip to content
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

DM-46356: Update testing to use new IsrTaskLSST calibration pipeline #41

Open
wants to merge 12 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

erykoff
Copy link
Contributor

@erykoff erykoff commented Sep 18, 2024

The old "legacy" calibration pipelines can still be tested locally by setting the environment variable export CI_CPP_LEGACY=1.

@erykoff erykoff requested a review from czwa September 19, 2024 00:08
Copy link
Collaborator

@czwa czwa left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the small pipeline rearranging suggested would be helpful for the future (and to keep all pipeline constructions consistent), but that can be pushed to a separate ticket (since this is already in a mess of merges).
Same with the certify/verify command flips: I think we should do it, but a separate ticket would be fine to make sure the rest of the merge is smooth.

[defects],
[
getPipeTaskCmd("linearizer", exposureDict["ptcExposurePairs"], "cpLinearizer.yaml"),
getCertifyCmd("linearizer"),
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should the verify command run before the certify command? I see that the current code matches what's here, but when we run these for real, the verify is run against the uncertified calibration. It probably doesn't matter, but if we have connections that can only be met by certified calibrations, then that could cause problems in production. I'm happy to take any tickets this spawns if something is broken.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've added DM-46432 to look into this, so it doesn't need to complicate the merging here. That ticket will decide what the right solution is.

DATA/SConscript Outdated
inputCollections = f"ci_cpp_ptc,{inputCollections}"

pipelineYaml = os.path.join(PKG_ROOT, "pipelines", pipelineFile)
pipelineYaml = os.path.join(PKG_ROOT, "pipelines", f"LATISS_legacy_{legacyDate}", pipelineFile)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this should be "LATISS", f"legacy_{legacyDate}" so the ci_cpp_gen3 override pipelines match the paths of the cp_pipe and cp_verify legacy pipelines. This will require runIsrLSST.yaml to be moved into a LATISS subdirectory, but that will make extensions to different camera datasets easier in the future.

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
description: ci_cpp CROSSTALK calibration construction
instrument: lsst.obs.lsst.Latiss
imports:
- location: $CP_PIPE_DIR/pipelines/LATISS/cpCrosstalk.yaml
- location: $CP_PIPE_DIR/pipelines/LATISS/legacy_202409/cpCrosstalk.yaml
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See comment above about adding subdirectories to have matching pipeline paths.

class: lsst.ip.isr.IsrTaskLSST
config:
doBrighterFatter: false
doDeferredCharge: false
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Mentioned above for instrument-specific pipeline path.

@@ -1,16 +1,11 @@
2021052500015:
FAILURES:
- RXX_S00 C11 CR_NOISE
SUCCESS: true
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is reassuring that we're dealing with defects better now.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants