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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[O2-5295] DPL Analysis: introduce aod-writer-df-offset option #13541

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

[O2-5295] DPL Analysis: introduce aod-writer-df-offset option #13541

wants to merge 2 commits into from
+46 −18

Conversation

aalkin
Copy link
Member

@aalkin aalkin commented Sep 26, 2024

Introduces --aod-writer-df-offset N option that makes dataframes numbers start from N+1. Can also be set in writer configuration JSON file as 'offset'.

@aalkin aalkin requested a review from a team as a code owner September 26, 2024 09:27
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION RELEASES:
To request your PR to be included in production software, please add the corresponding labels called "async-" to your PR. Add the labels directly (if you have the permissions) or add a comment of the form (note that labels are separated by a ",")

+async-label <label1>, <label2>, !<label3> ...

This will add <label1> and <label2> and removes <label3>.

The following labels are available
async-2023-pbpb-apass4
async-2023-pp-apass4
async-2024-pp-apass1
async-2022-pp-apass7
async-2024-pp-cpass0

@aalkin aalkin requested review from sawenzel and ktf September 26, 2024 09:27
ktf
ktf reviewed Sep 26, 2024
View reviewed changes
Framework/Core/src/DataOutputDirector.cxx
itemName = "OutputDescriptors";
if (dodirItem.HasMember(itemName)) {
std::string slh("/");
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

static / const, no?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The whole thing needs a refactoring pass, but it is not critical.

ktf
ktf previously approved these changes Sep 26, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ktf ktf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Assuming it was tested, fine with me. We should get rid of the tuple in a subsequent PR, IMHO.

sawenzel
sawenzel previously approved these changes Sep 26, 2024
View reviewed changes
@jgrosseo
Copy link
Collaborator

I just posted comments on the related JIRA ticket which may be relevant...

The DF/TF number is internally available and some task may grab it and use it for something. In this case the number will be different in the file than during the current processing. Why we do not set it before generation?

@jgrosseo
Copy link
Collaborator

Discussion continues on https://its.cern.ch/jira/browse/O2-5295

@jgrosseo jgrosseo marked this pull request as draft September 27, 2024 07:31
@aalkin aalkin dismissed stale reviews from sawenzel and ktf via 5b8151f October 15, 2024 07:44
@github-actions GitHub Actions
Copy link
Contributor

This PR did not have any update in the last 30 days. Is it still needed? Unless further action in will be closed in 5 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Nov 15, 2024
@aalkin
Copy link
Member Author

aalkin commented Nov 19, 2024

Replaced by #13711

@aalkin aalkin closed this Nov 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@sawenzel sawenzel sawenzel left review comments

@ktf ktf ktf left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
stale
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@aalkin @jgrosseo @ktf @sawenzel