[Clas12_calcom] database tables

[Cole Smith]

The FADC250 firmware parameters are already in the datastream, which is 
where the decoder should ultimately look to configure itself. However if
we decide to run in Mode 1 it is my opinion the decoder should emulate
Mode 7 pulse integration rather than use fixed pulse integration windows.

Cole


On Mon, 11 Apr 2016, nick markov wrote:

> Dear all,
> these are not part of the decoder, but in my opinion in would be convenient to have them stored somewhere other than fadc configuration file.
> Nick.
>> On Apr 11, 2016, at 11:09 AM, Raffaella De Vita <Raffaella.Devita at ge.infn.it> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Cole,
>> in the discussion we had on Friday, it came out that what would be useful to have in the DB (to remove hard coded parameters from calib/monitor code) are the pedestal and pulse ranges that the decoder uses to get the pulse charge for mode 1 data.
>> If necessary, we can also add the windows parameters but, if I understood correctly, these are not needed to decode the data.
>> Regards,
>>    Raffaella
>>
>> Cole Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> I wasn't at the meeting but Nick's original question referred
>>> to the capture window parameters.  I would suggest window_offset and window_width instead of pulse, to avoid confusion over the meaning.
>>> Using fixed pulse integration windows could be dangerous.
>>>
>>> Cole
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2016, Raffaella De Vita wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear All,
>>>> following Nick's question and the discussion we had last Friday, I edited the document (see attachment) to reflect the proposed change to the /daq/fadc table that would now also contain the parameter for Mode 1 analysis. The proposed names are pedestal_start, pedestal_width, pulse_start, pulse_width .
>>>> Comments are welcome.
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>    Raffaella
>>>>
>>>> nick markov wrote:
>>>>> Dear CALCOM group,
>>>>> I wonder if it possible and needed to add to the DAQ parameters tables
>>>>> parameters of MODE1 readings:
>>>>> FADC250_W_OFFSET
>>>>> FADC250_W_WIDTH
>>>>> Nick.
>>>>>>  On Apr 1, 2016, at 11:09 AM, Mac Mestayer <mestayer at jlab.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>  Dear CALCOM group;
>>>>>>>  Thanks for the concise and well-written guidelines.
>>>>>>  They are very good for focussing discussion.
>>>>>>>  I agree with most of the 'best practices' advocated, so
>>>>>>  I will only mention my two disagreements here:
>>>>>>>  1) sector, layer, component need not be enforced on the
>>>>>>  tables (CCDB is much more flexible than CALDB was in this regard).
>>>>>>  Not only that, but sector, layer, component is not at all applicable
>>>>>>  to the drift chamber data-base.  See > https://clasweb.jlab.org/wiki/index.php/DC-calibration_Constants
>>>>>>  for a description of the DC calibration table structure.
>>>>>>  We use indices like region, superlayer or region, superlayer, board, >  connector, etc. and I refuse to call a superlayer a layer, etc.
>>>>>>  There is no need to try to enforce a false structure on everyone.
>>>>>>>  2) we should not use run number to denote a variation, such as
>>>>>>  Monte Carlo.  This is precisely what variations are designed to do.
>>>>>>  Talk to Hall D to find out how they use various variations to denote
>>>>>>  Monte Carlo.  In fact, I think we may want to use actual run number
>>>>>>  ranges for the Monte Carlo variations to follow, for example, different
>>>>>>  luminosities and this proposed use of run numbers will just confuse
>>>>>>  people.
>>>>>>>      regards, Mac
>>>>>>>  "mestayer at jlab.org", (757)-269-7252
>>>>>>>  On Fri, 1 Apr 2016, Raffaella De Vita wrote:
>>>>>>>>  Dear Harut and Bryan,
>>>>>>>  following the discussion we had on the database, we have collected a > >  set of "guidelines" concerning the calibration constants table > >  structure, the use of variations, the use of run numbers etc.  that we > > would like to distribute. You can find in attachment the document we > >  have produced.
>>>>>>>  Let us know what you think about it.
>>>>>>>  Best regards,
>>>>>>>     Raffaella
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>  Clas12_calcom mailing list
>>>>>>  Clas12_calcom at jlab.org
>>>>>>  https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_calcom
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Clas12_calcom mailing list
> Clas12_calcom at jlab.org
> https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/clas12_calcom
>