Hi Christian, Actually, I am making the transition to bratmain and am finding that I like it. I have no problem with moving the calibration initialization out of the module, but I'm still not sure why one would be running modules for different runs at the same time. In any case, now that I know your reasoning it should be easier for me to keep falling into the same trap. Thanks. ...Steve Christian Holm Christensen wrote: > Hi Steve, > > On Tue, 13 Nov 2001 09:12:55 -0600 > "Stephen J. Sanders" <ssanders@ku.edu> wrote > concerning "Re: brat tag 21-1-27, mult classes updated": > >> Hi Christian, >> There is a subtlety here that I'm clearly missing. Do you envision >> a disconnect between a specific run and the corresponding calibrations? > > > No, that's not what I'm refering to - in fact, the database has been > designed so that that's impossible (well, not entirely if you know > what to do - but in effect). > >> I suspect I keep trying to do something outside of the brat framework >> because I'm missing how you envision the code being used. > > > I don't understand why you keep insisting doing things in highly > specialised programs that in practise no one but you (and perhaps a few > others) understand. Unfortunately, there are other persons in BRAHMS > that has done things that way too, which has lead to double work, > confusions, frustrations, and anger. Fortunately, these feelings has > not been directed against you, but towards others in the collaboration > that I'd rather not name. > > We really should avoid these kind of things - we're just to few in the > collaboration to get into these kind of situations. That is why I > have on many occasions requested that you make the code you have > standarised and avalible in BRAT. Then it's there for everyone to see > and use, comment on, improve, inspired by, and trust. > > Again - if you have problems intergrating stuff into BRAT - do not > hesitate to contact me, or others (after reading the avaliable docs > obviously). I'll gladly help you, but I can only do that if your work > is public and at least makes the effort of intergrating into BRAT. > > For example, I made (some 8-9 months ago) skeleton modules for doing > the pedestal calibrations for the TMA and SMA. They're in > modules/calib/mult/Br[Si|Tile]PEdCalModule. Could you please look at > them, and see if that's what you need to do. All kind of > calibrations, including the onces based on BRAG data should (and can) > be made in this fashion. Perhaps a quick glance at the stuff Djamel > and Claus made for the BB/TOF/C1/RICH detectors could be > inspirrering. > >> Could you give an example of the situation: >> >> "Imagine what happens >> if you certainly start reading in at two places in the code - >> unbeknownst to your modules, they could very well have the wrong >> calibrations. " > > > What I'm refering to, is if one module reads calibrations for run X, > while another read calibrations for run Y, and your script read > calibrations for run Z! Chaos, Mayhem, and so on. > >> I'll make the changes that you suggest later today since I'll need >> to make corresponding changes to my configuration script. > > > Good. > > >> I'll also be expanding the number of "calibrated" runs over the next >> couple of days. However, the 4640 calibration should be good >> (pedestals, gaps, gains, etc.). I am still seeing some small >> differerences in my centrality cuts compared to what Hiro has and so >> this is lso something that Hiro and I need to resolve. > > > Ok. I'll start to make the SDE centrality calibrations today. > > Yours, > > Christian Holm Christensen ------------------------------------------- > Address: Sankt Hansgade 23, 1. th. Phone: (+45) 35 35 96 91 > DK-2200 Copenhagen N Cell: (+45) 28 82 16 23 > Denmark Office: (+45) 353 25 305 > Email: cholm@nbi.dk Web: www.nbi.dk/~cholm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Wed Nov 14 2001 - 09:50:04 EST