brunel.UseDBSnapshot now is False in RichAnalyzer

also: changes to the elapsed time output in the ELOG and summary.txt elapsed_time now starts from when the iterator gets the configure command changed Brunel Rec options CKThetaResRange and CKThetaQuartzRefractCorrections from lists to tuples ... and then removed CKThetaQuartzRefractCorrections from the mirror alignment, now using defaults

Paras, note this change was only suggested as a temporary measure, when running on OLD data, from 2016. For this years data taking you I think need to use the fake DB. So just turning it off is not really an option... You should discuss how to handle this properly with the online experts.

Hi Chris. OK, noted. I guess the question is whether to merge this change or not? If you think it should not be merged then I can of course do this manually whenever I checkout the code to be run at the pit during the pre-2017 testing period.

approved this merge request

added 7 commits

• dfffc932 - 1 commit from branch master
• 5b37c28b - Removed CKThetaQuartzRefractCorrections from the mirror alignment, now using defaults
• 0ed5d37e - Changed CKThetaResRange type from list to tuple, as required by the newest Rec
• 684a00e8 - Changed the alignment elapsed time timer to start upon each CONFIGURE
• b31d78d2 - Changed elapsed time in ELOG and summary.txt to a more readable format
• 9a34459d - brunel.UseDBSnapshot now is False in RichAnalyzer (this may be temporary, curren…
• e0c867f8 - brunel.UseDBSnapshot now is False in RichAnalyzer (this may be temporary, curren…

Compare with previous version

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for e0c867f8 succeeds

OK, since Chris approved it, I assume it is ok to take these commits, so I rebased and merged it.

closed

yes, we discussed it in the rich meeting. decided to commit but to bear in mind it might need changing later on.

I will also put in one more "questionable" commit soon. Rest assured these will be documented in our Mirror Alignment release notes and high on our list to address once we have confirmed thing work on 2016 data and are getting ready for 2017.

Hi Jordi, it looks like this branch hasn't actually been merged yet. Am I correct?

Indeed, I do not see any associated commit into master at

https://gitlab.cern.ch/lhcb/Panoptes/commits/master

Jordi, can you check what happened ?

reopened

merged

@pnaik The request was rebased and approved, and gitlab "promised" to merge it after completing the continuous integration. Apparently gitlab does not keep its promises ... I pushed the changes to master manually, and now gitlab apparently considers that it is merged.

Thanks Jordi!