Uploaded image for project: 'Data Management'
  1. Data Management
  2. DM-15421

Change to use constrained models by default

    XMLWordPrintable

    Details

      Description

      Now that there is a working constrained photometry model, I believe it is time to switch jointcal's default config to use the constrained models instead of the simple models. The rationale is that all of the "important" cameras we work with are mosaic cameras (the constrained model doesn't make sense for single chip cameras), and the constrained model is a better model of the system behavior than the simple model.

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment - - edited

            Hsin-Fang Chiang: do you mind doing this small review? Once this is in place, you can try using jointcal in the HSC weeklies with the default config, which should be a useful starting point.

            Note that I'm going hiking for a few days, so will be out of touch until roughly August 29th.

            Can you try to set up jointcal to run in the next HSC weekly, or do a trial run of it, with this ticket, to see how it does, please?

            Show
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment - - edited Hsin-Fang Chiang : do you mind doing this small review? Once this is in place, you can try using jointcal in the HSC weeklies with the default config, which should be a useful starting point. Note that I'm going hiking for a few days, so will be out of touch until roughly August 29th. Can you try to set up jointcal to run in the next HSC weekly, or do a trial run of it, with this ticket, to see how it does, please?
            Hide
            hchiang2 Hsin-Fang Chiang added a comment -

            I just noticed that testdata_jointcal is not part of lsst_distrib nor part of lsst_ci. Many tests in jointcal are skipped without testdata_jointcal. Do you know whether jointcal are built and tested fully somewhere in the DM team's Jenkins CI system?

            Show
            hchiang2 Hsin-Fang Chiang added a comment - I just noticed that testdata_jointcal is not part of lsst_distrib nor part of lsst_ci . Many tests in jointcal are skipped without testdata_jointcal . Do you know whether jointcal are built and tested fully somewhere in the DM team's Jenkins CI system?
            Hide
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment -

            testdata_jointcal gets pulled into lsst_distrib by jointcal. It's specifically listed in a "do not install" list for the binaries along with all the other testdata, validation_data, and afwdata repositories, because they're so large. When you run jenkins, it runs with testdata_jointcal.

            Show
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment - testdata_jointcal gets pulled into lsst_distrib by jointcal. It's specifically listed in a "do not install" list for the binaries along with all the other testdata, validation_data, and afwdata repositories, because they're so large. When you run jenkins, it runs with testdata_jointcal.
            Hide
            hchiang2 Hsin-Fang Chiang added a comment -

            Great it's pulled in and tested! And that explains why testdata is not in the shared stack..

            Show
            hchiang2 Hsin-Fang Chiang added a comment - Great it's pulled in and tested! And that explains why testdata is not in the shared stack..
            Hide
            hchiang2 Hsin-Fang Chiang added a comment -

            The changes look fine to me. If you are not gone for hiking yet, feel free to merge it, so they get included in the next weekly (w_2018_34). I didn't test processing HSC data manually with the ticket branch, but if it's included in w_2018_34 I will start including it in the regular biweekly reprocessing next week.

            Show
            hchiang2 Hsin-Fang Chiang added a comment - The changes look fine to me. If you are not gone for hiking yet, feel free to merge it, so they get included in the next weekly (w_2018_34). I didn't test processing HSC data manually with the ticket branch, but if it's included in w_2018_34 I will start including it in the regular biweekly reprocessing next week.
            Hide
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment -

            Thanks for the quick review: you got it in just before I left.

            Merged and done.

            Show
            Parejkoj John Parejko added a comment - Thanks for the quick review: you got it in just before I left. Merged and done.

              People

              Assignee:
              Parejkoj John Parejko
              Reporter:
              Parejkoj John Parejko
              Reviewers:
              Hsin-Fang Chiang
              Watchers:
              Hsin-Fang Chiang, Jim Bosch, John Parejko, John Swinbank, Lauren MacArthur
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              5 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: