Re: Calibration database.,

From: Kris Hagel (hagel@CyclotronMail.tamu.edu)
Date: Fri Nov 09 2001 - 12:31:44 EST

  • Next message: Christian Holm Christensen: "Re: Calibration database.,"

    I am in favor of enduring the short term hardships and fixing the 
    problem and then repopulating the database.  I think that we are early enough in 
    the production use of the DB that it is wise to do that.
    
    Kris
    
    Quoting Flemming Videbaek <videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov>:
    
    > 
    > Database problems
    > 
    > As you may have seen Steve Sanders pointed to a problem with the
    > calibration
    > DB in so far data was not correctly transferred to his linux ppc.
    > Christian and I have since looked at it further, and must admit that we
    > made
    > a mistake / design flaw back about 1.5 year ago.
    > Unfortunately only now has it shown up.
    > There seem to be several possibilities on how to proceed.
    > 
    > a)       Ignore the problem i.e. DB access cannot be done to
    > calibrations
    > from linux ppc, solaris etc
    > b)       Modification to code, that will disallow certain operation to
    > be
    > invalid on e.g.
    > linux-ppc and solaris machines, but maintain access to db constants via
    > the
    > BrCalibration class only
    > c)       Redesign the table Revision that hold the calibration data, as
    > well
    > as the internal
    > storage. This implies the Cal DB has to be re-populated. It may be
    > possible
    > to do this
    > by extracting the revisions, deleting and then re-creating, the easier
    > would
    > be to ask the limited cal done so far to be re-inserted e.g. DO thought
    > it
    > was ok for all the TO\F
    > stuff.
    > 
    > 
    >  The solution a) is clear un-acceptable; though most work is done on
    > the
    > intel boxes, a
    > not insignificant piece is done on platforms with opposite endian data
    > storage.
    > 
    >  The solution b) does not really appeal to neither Christian nor me, and
    > is
    > therefore un-
    > desirable.  The last solution is not convenient,. I have looked in
    > detail at
    > it and it is
    > workable, even though it has some slight messy pieces (same information
    > both
    > in
    > Parameter and Revision, which could lead to problems if people were to
    > exploit low-
    > level access). The last solution imposes some hard-ship on the ongoing
    > analysis, but
    > could probably be put in during a scheduled stopping and refilling of
    > the
    > DB.
    > 
    >  It is obvious something has to be done, and the sooner the better.
    > 
    > In particular I will like comments back from people who have made
    > actual
    > valid
    > calibrations (don't count pedestals- too easy) for tof, cherenkovs,
    > tiles,
    > si . I/we will be
    > happy to provide you copies of the tougths made so far.
    > 
    >  Flemming
    > 
    > 
    > ------------------------------------------------------
    > Flemming Videbaek
    > Physics Department
    > Brookhaven National Laboratory
    > 
    > tlf: 631-344-4106
    > fax 631-344-1334
    > e-mail: videbaek@bnl.gov
    > 
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Nov 09 2001 - 12:32:03 EST