Uploaded image for project: 'Request For Comments'
  1. Request For Comments
  2. RFC-600

Proposed OSS & DMSR Updates to Clarify Alert-Related Contents

    XMLWordPrintable

    Details

    • Type: RFC
    • Status: Implemented
    • Resolution: Done
    • Component/s: DM
    • Labels:

      Description

      The purpose of this RFC is to solicit input on a draft Change Request which will clarify requirements and specifications in the OSS (LSE-30) and the DMSR (LSE-61) that are related to the alert stream.

      The proposed changes are provided in the uploaded ascii file.

        Attachments

        1. draft_rfc_05_28_19_B.txt
          10 kB
        2. draft_rfc_05_28_19.txt
          9 kB
        3. draft_rfc_05_29_19.txt
          10 kB
        4. draft_rfc_05_30_19.txt
          9 kB
        5. draft_rfc_06_03_19.txt
          9 kB
        6. draft_rfc_06_05_19.txt
          11 kB
        7. draft_rfc_06_07_19.txt
          12 kB
        8. draft_rfc_06_10_19.txt
          12 kB
        9. draft_rfc_06_11_19.txt
          11 kB
        10. draft_rfc_06_12_19.txt
          11 kB
        11. draft_rfc_06_13_19_B.txt
          12 kB
        12. draft_rfc_06_13_19.txt
          11 kB
        13. draft_rfc_06_14_19.txt
          13 kB
        14. draft_rfc_06_27_19.txt
          14 kB

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            mgraham Melissa Graham added a comment - - edited

            Version: draft_rfc_06_14_19.txt

            After discussion in DM-SST telecon today, added "Issue G" and "Item 7" to clarify the phrase "degrade gracefully" in OSS-REQ-0193. This is still under discussion, more feedback still welcome.

            Also linked nAlertVisitPeak with OTT1 by altering the opening statement of DMS-REQ-0004 to say "For visits resulting in fewer than nAlertVisitPeak, LSST must be capable of ... " (and added a discussion to sciVisitAlertDelay to make that definition consistent).

            Show
            mgraham Melissa Graham added a comment - - edited Version: draft_rfc_06_14_19.txt After discussion in DM-SST telecon today, added "Issue G" and "Item 7" to clarify the phrase "degrade gracefully" in OSS-REQ-0193. This is still under discussion, more feedback still welcome. Also linked nAlertVisitPeak with OTT1 by altering the opening statement of DMS-REQ-0004 to say "For visits resulting in fewer than nAlertVisitPeak, LSST must be capable of ... " (and added a discussion to sciVisitAlertDelay to make that definition consistent).
            Hide
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment -

            In OSS-REQ-0193, the specification refers to an 'average value of at least nAlertVisitAvg' whereas the Description field defines nAlertVisitAvg as a 'Minimum number of alerts required to be accommodated from a single standard visit'. This is not consistent, the Description should be updated to specify that nAlertVisitAvg is an average value computed nightly.

            Show
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment - In OSS-REQ-0193, the specification refers to an 'average value of at least nAlertVisitAvg' whereas the Description field defines nAlertVisitAvg as a 'Minimum number of alerts required to be accommodated from a single standard visit'. This is not consistent, the Description should be updated to specify that nAlertVisitAvg is an average value computed nightly.
            Hide
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment -

            In Item 6: the description sates ' The long-term average number of alerts per visit.', but we are computing this average nightly - I would update this to say 'The nightly average number of alerts per visit'

            Show
            lguy Leanne Guy added a comment - In Item 6: the description sates ' The long-term average number of alerts per visit.', but we are computing this average nightly - I would update this to say 'The nightly average number of alerts per visit'
            Hide
            mgraham Melissa Graham added a comment -

            Version: draft_rfc_06_27_19.txt

            To satisfy Issue E (the mild confusiong between documents about nAlertVisitAvg), we proposed to more tightly define nAlertVisitAvg with a new specification in the DMSR (Item 6).

            However, the corresponding (and slightly confusing) specification OSS-REQ-0193 should also be updated so that OSS and DMSR match in their definition of nAlertVisitAvg.

            Therefore, Item 7 now proposes updates to OSS-REQ-0193 that clarify the definition of nAlertVisitAvg (in addition to clarifying the term 'degrade gracefully', as previously discussed).

            Minor updates to the text of Item 6 were also made to clarify that nAlertVisitAvg is the minimum of a nightly average of the number of alerts per visit, and that this applies to standard visits.

            Watchers should please verify that these (minor) updates for items 6 and 7 are satisfactory, and we can move this RFC into a proper LCR.

             

            Show
            mgraham Melissa Graham added a comment - Version: draft_rfc_06_27_19.txt To satisfy Issue E (the mild confusiong between documents about nAlertVisitAvg), we proposed to more tightly define nAlertVisitAvg with a new specification in the DMSR (Item 6). However, the corresponding (and slightly confusing) specification OSS-REQ-0193 should also be updated so that OSS and DMSR match in their definition of nAlertVisitAvg. Therefore, Item 7 now proposes updates to OSS-REQ-0193 that clarify the definition of nAlertVisitAvg (in addition to clarifying the term 'degrade gracefully', as previously discussed). Minor updates to the text of Item 6 were also made to clarify that nAlertVisitAvg is the minimum of a nightly average of the number of alerts per visit, and that this applies to standard visits. Watchers should please verify that these (minor) updates for items 6 and 7 are satisfactory, and we can move this RFC into a proper LCR.  
            Hide
            mgraham Melissa Graham added a comment -

            This RFC is complete, and the Change Request has been submitted:

            https://project.lsst.org/groups/ccb/node/3394

            Show
            mgraham Melissa Graham added a comment - This RFC is complete, and the Change Request has been submitted: https://project.lsst.org/groups/ccb/node/3394

              People

              Assignee:
              mgraham Melissa Graham
              Reporter:
              mgraham Melissa Graham
              Watchers:
              Colin Slater, Eric Bellm, Gabriele Comoretto (Inactive), Gregory Dubois-Felsmann, John Swinbank, Kian-Tat Lim, Leanne Guy, Melissa Graham, Michael Wood-Vasey, Michelle Butler, Tim Jenness, Wil O'Mullane
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              12 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:
                Planned End: