Re: Upcoming BRAT changes

From: Christian Holm Christensen (cholm@hehi03.nbi.dk)
Date: Wed Dec 12 2001 - 14:00:16 EST

  • Next message: Eun-Joo Kim: "BrTrackTree"

    Hi Kris, Flemming, et al, 
    
    On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 11:19:45 -0500
    "Flemming Videbaek" <videbaek@sgs1.hirg.bnl.gov> wrote
    concerning "Re: Upcoming BRAT changes":
    > Hej Christian,
    > 
    > This looks like a nice set of changes to implement, and makes the
    > meaning of run/job/lecl much clearer.  Just one comment - do you
    > have to do changes in the geantinput module too ? I can certainly
    > see have to read multiple files of those to get enough statistics ?
    
    The changes are mostly in BrIOModule, since that's the module that
    deals with multiple files. Subclasses only (fortunately) deal with
    single files.  In fact, BrEventIO should really be spit into two
    sub-classes: one reading, and one writting! But that's outside the
    current scope. 
    
    The BRAG output input (read it again - it does make sense in some odd
    way :-) is the only thing I need to test.  Otherwise it looks good.
    It has to do with what kind of status the module sets. 
    
    I'd like to point out, again, that output modules does not gain
    _anything_ from this - it simply doesn't make sense.  If that's a
    problem, well too bad, I'm not going to implement that - takes to
    bloody long, and the pay off is to low - maximising the efficientcy
    function, to speak in (unpopular?) tradidional economics tounges. 
    
    The changes should of course propegate to BrDbUpdateModule - I'll work
    with Djam on that. 
    
    On Wed, 12 Dec 2001 12:01:23 -0600
    Kris Hagel <hagel@comp.tamu.edu> wrote
    concerning "Re: Upcoming BRAT changes":
    > Christian,
    > The changes you propose sound good.  I especially like the BrAppXXXOption
    > being able to have multiple values.  I had been frustrated with that
    > limitation and at one time had thought to launch into making it happen
    > before finding another bandaid.  This will allow some cleanup elsewhere.
    
    That change was kind of fun, since you hav to deal with deault values
    being overwritten.  It worked out in the end, at the expense of some
    clarity, but at this simple level - who gives a s**t. 
    
    What do you think of the BrModule::Debug and BrModule::Info idea? 
    
    Ayway, I'll probably submit the changes Friday, baring no complains
    from fellow collaborators. 
    
    It's amassing how much time you have when you're waiting for data from
    the quasi-stable CRS, especially when jobs get killed in the middle of
    absolutly nothing.  Mind you, processing one 100K run with only the
    TMA, SMA, and BB in takes about 10 min.  Seriously, the CRS is not at
    all optimal, and I think implementing a schedular on top is a bloody
    waste of time - RCF should provide that - and they should provide a
    search engine for our mailing-list archives too!  Now, please! 
    
    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 Dec 12 2001 - 14:01:11 EST