<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div>Hi all,</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Great ! seems we agree on the recon version, now what about analysis.xml version (the analysis launch for 2016ver20 wiki says <span style="color: rgb(55, 56, 58); font-family: Slack-Lato, appleLogo, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; font-variant-ligatures: common-ligatures; orphans: 2; widows: 2; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" class="">analysis-2017_01-ver20.xml</span>) bu MCwrapper does not find it !</div><div><br class=""></div><div>— Nacer</div><div><br class=""></div><div><br class=""></div><div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 6. May 2020, at 23:26, Alexander Austregesilo <<a href="mailto:aaustreg@jlab.org" class="">aaustreg@jlab.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div class="">There is no such xml file, and if there was, it would not be useful for your purpose. He just has to use the latest recon-2017_01-ver03_*.xml, same as for spring 2017. We could provide a link to fulfill the naming convention.<br class=""><br class=""><br class="">On 5/6/2020 5:19 PM, Mark Ito wrote:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Sean and Alex,<br class=""><br class="">Wow. You guys have good memories!<br class=""><br class="">I will go on to 2 of 4 until someone finds that file.<br class=""><br class=""> -- Mark<br class=""><br class="">On 5/6/20 5:06 PM, Sean Dobbs wrote:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Mark,<br class=""><br class="">If I remember correctly, 2016-02ver06 was reconstructed with the same<br class="">software as 2017-01ver03 at roughly the same time. If we check the<br class="">website:<br class=""><a href="https://halldweb.jlab.org/cgi-bin/data_monitoring/monitoring/dataVersions.py" class="">https://halldweb.jlab.org/cgi-bin/data_monitoring/monitoring/dataVersions.py</a> <br class="">recon2016-02ver06 was reconstructed with the version set<br class="">version_recon_2016_02_ver06.xml (I think there was a typo on the<br class="">page). The link is broken, but if we can track the file down, that<br class="">would answer the question.<br class=""><br class="">Data for analysis launches should be stored in here as well. but<br class="">perhaps that's a problem for version 2 of this database.<br class=""><br class="">---Sean<br class=""><br class="">On Wed, May 6, 2020 at 4:57 PM Mark Ito <<a href="mailto:marki@jlab.org" class="">marki@jlab.org</a>> wrote:<br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">Folks,<br class=""><br class="">The first analysis launch on Nacer's list of four is "2016ver20". Here<br class="">is the web page:<br class=""><br class=""><a href="https://halldweb.jlab.org/wiki-private/index.php/Spring_2016_Analysis_Launch#Version20" class="">https://halldweb.jlab.org/wiki-private/index.php/Spring_2016_Analysis_Launch#Version20</a> <br class=""><br class="">There is no version information there, but it does name the REST<br class="">production run it was produced from. That is REST ver06. From that page:<br class=""><br class=""> REST ver06 (August 2018), runs 11366 - 11555 ('golden period')<br class=""><br class="">That reconstruction launch appears on this web page:<br class=""><br class=""><a href="https://halldweb.jlab.org/wiki-private/index.php/Spring_2016_Dataset_Summary#Full_REST_Production" class="">https://halldweb.jlab.org/wiki-private/index.php/Spring_2016_Dataset_Summary#Full_REST_Production</a> <br class=""><br class="">It is the fourth line from the bottom. The link on that line leads to<br class="">this page:<br class=""><br class=""><a href="https://halldweb.jlab.org/data_monitoring/recon/summary_swif_output_recon_2016-02_ver06_batch01.html" class="">https://halldweb.jlab.org/data_monitoring/recon/summary_swif_output_recon_2016-02_ver06_batch01.html</a> <br class=""><br class="">which does not contain any version information.<br class=""><br class="">If I list tags from halld_recon that match *recon*2016* I get:<br class=""><br class=""> [marki@markdesk4 halld_recon]$ git tag | grep 2016 | grep recon<br class=""> recon-2016_02-ver01<br class=""> recon-2016_02-ver02<br class=""> recon-2016_02-ver03<br class=""> recon-2016_02-ver04<br class=""><br class="">If I do the same search for tags in sim-recon, I get:<br class=""><br class=""> [marki@markdesk4 sim-recon]$ git tag | grep 2016 | grep recon<br class=""> recon-2016_02-ver01<br class=""> recon-2016_02-ver02<br class=""> recon-2016_02-ver03<br class=""> recon-2016_02-ver04<br class=""><br class="">Recall that halld_recon started as a clone of sim-recon. So we expect<br class="">tags that were applied to sim-recon to appear in both sim-recon and<br class="">halld_recon. So these four tags were all initially applied when we were<br class="">still using sim-recon. Note there is no tag for recon-2016_02-ver06.<br class=""><br class="">I have been making backups of sim-recon and halld_recon and writing them<br class="">to tape before deleting them from the group disk. If I look in the tape<br class="">library I see:<br class=""><br class=""> lorentz:marki:releases> ls *2016_02*<br class="">sim-recon-recon-2016_02-ver03_Linux_CentOS6-x86_64-gcc4.9.2.tar.gz<br class="">sim-recon-recon-2016_02-ver03_Linux_CentOS7-x86_64-gcc4.8.5.tar.gz<br class="">sim-recon-recon-2016_02-ver03_Linux_RHEL6-x86_64-gcc4.9.2.tar.gz<br class="">sim-recon-recon-2016_02-ver03_Linux_RHEL7-x86_64-gcc4.8.5.tar.gz<br class="">sim-recon-recon-2016_02-ver04-Linux_CentOS7-x86_64-gcc4.8.5.tar.gz<br class=""><br class="">so again no 2016_02-ver06. And there is no CentOS7.7 build and no<br class="">container build either. Also note that launches are were _never_ run<br class="">from builds on the group disk (except for on the OSG and at NERSC). The<br class="">launch-meister always builds his own version on /work/halld. But I think<br class="">that that is the least of our worries.<br class=""><br class="">My best guess is that ver06 was built with the ver04 tag, and perhaps<br class="">run with updated calibration constants or software settings. So I can<br class="">try to build the ver04 tag. I think that that should work.<br class=""><br class="">Now which version of halld_sim should I use to go with it? Two choices:<br class=""><br class="">A) the latest halld_sim<br class=""><br class="">B) the simulation code that is contained in the old sim-recon<br class=""><br class="">and perhaps there are others. In case (A) there is no guarantee that a<br class="">modern halld_sim will build against an old halld_recon, at least not<br class="">without a fight. In case (B), that is a very old version of the simulation.<br class=""><br class="">Another question: which version of hdgeant4 should I use. Recall hdgean4<br class="">depends on halld_recon.<br class=""><br class="">One final point. The intention is to get all of this running with<br class="">MCwrapper. There may or may not be issues there.<br class=""><br class="">Thoughts?<br class=""><br class=""> -- Mark<br class=""><br class="">P. S. For the record, the other three analysis launches Nacer mentions<br class="">are 2017ver21, 2018_08ver02, and 2018_01_ver03.<br class=""><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">Halld-offline mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Halld-offline@jlab.org" class="">Halld-offline@jlab.org</a><br class="">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/halld-offline<br class=""></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>_______________________________________________<br class="">Halld-offline mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:Halld-offline@jlab.org" class="">Halld-offline@jlab.org</a><br class="">https://mailman.jlab.org/mailman/listinfo/halld-offline<br class=""></div></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>