From deliot@hep.saclay.cea.fr Thu Apr 29 16:30:32 2004 Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2004 14:12:23 +0200 From: Frederic Deliot To: Yann Coadou Cc: Serban Protopopescu , Dugan ONeil , Gordon Watts , greenlee@fnal.gov, Serban PROTOPOPESCU , Yaroslav Kulik Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Trigger info and the data format working group] Hi Yann, >We thought, given the way the group charge was written, that it was to >develop tmb_tree, > Yes, but in fact, the charge has changed. tmb_tree is not "automatically" the choosen common format even if it's a good candidate. Cheers, Frederic. >On Tue, 2004-04-06 at 12:48, Serban Protopopescu wrote: > > >>Hi, >> >>I wouldn't say it has been decided by the group whether to go the tmb tree >>root way. What I am saying is that developing yet another format is not >>going >>to go anywhere. Perhaps I mispoke, I was under the impression >>that top root files are an ntuple format, not a tree with branches, >>TCloneArrays and the rest of the root tree paraphernalia. >> >> Serban >> >>Yann Coadou wrote: >> >> >> >>>Hi Serban >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>The way I see it there are basically two choices: >>>>1) you use classes and make your information available in object oriented >>>>form, in which case all we have right now is tmb root tree >>>>2) you fill a root tuple with the information in arrays. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>What Dugan meant here is that there are already many different ways of >>>producing different root trees. tmb_tree is one of them, you also have >>>the top_analyze version or the trigsimcert one, and I guess several >>>others. All those programs produce an object oriented root tree, but >>>with different structures/syntax. Since until now there was no official >>>format, we decided to create our own classes (based on what Josh Dyer >>>had done originally). Now it looks like the group that was appointed for >>>a common root format has as a charge not to find the better way, put to >>>expand on one that is already chosen, the tmb_tree format. Fine by me. >>>If this group had been formed 2 months ago, I would have put all my >>>effort directly in tmb_tree, but it was not the case then. Given the >>>time scale, we will finish trigsimcert, and I'll then be in touch with >>>Gordon to make tmb_tree really trigger useful. As far as I know there is >>>a lot of missing trigger stuff so far, and level 3 information is >>>definitely not user friendly. We can remedy this, it's just time >>>consuming and not my priority for the coming week. >>> >>>Cheers, >>>Yann >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>Dugan ONeil wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Hi Gordon, >>>>>OK. We did look at the code in TMBTree before starting. The reason that >>>>>we didn't just add things to TMBTrees is because it was not THE D0 >>>>>standard format at the time (wouldn't want it to go away from underneath >>>>>us). A lot of the work that Yann has put in has been to fill out the >>>>>info.....he has added many classes for different L3 objects for example. >>>>>He says that most of what he has done he could translate to >>>>>TMBTree-style with just some tedious changes to how the classes are fed. >>>>>The ROOT macros should require very little modification. >>>>> >>>>>As long as Yann and Gordon stay in touch I think we can take good care >>>>>of the trigger content of the TMBTree. We will still complete the work >>>>>on trigsimcert for p17 so you should see an announcement of its >>>>>existence (+ features) soon. >>>>> >>>>>Thanks, >>>>>Dugan. >>>>> >>>>>On Mon, 2004-04-05 at 18:42, Gordon Watts wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>Hi Dugan, >>>>>>Good point. Thanks. If we don't get in touch with you soon enough >>>>>>pester me again. I don't know how this is going to work out, but I'll >>>>>>try to make sure that we add it to the list of things. >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Gordon. >>>>>> >>>>>>-----Original Message----- >>>>>>From: Dugan ONeil [mailto:dugan_oneil@sfu.ca] >>>>>>Sent: Monday, April 05, 2004 11:34 AM >>>>>>To: greenlee@fnal.gov; Serban PROTOPOPESCU; Gordon Watts; Yaroslav >>>>>>Kulik; deliot@hep.saclay.cea.fr >>>>>>Cc: Yann Coadou >>>>>>Subject: Trigger info and the data format working group >>>>>> >>>>>>Hi Herb, Serban, Gordon, Slava, Frederic >>>>>> >>>>>>I am very glad you have agreed to tackle the issue of a common ROOT >>>>>>format for D0! This is certainly needed. >>>>>> >>>>>>I wanted to make you aware that a couple of SFU people (led by Yann >>>>>>Coadou) have been writing tools to look at trigger output in the TMB. A >>>>>>standard tree is produced using some well-thought-out classes and some >>>>>>nice macros are provided to look at the contents (including every >>>>>>trigger subsystem, no more need to supply a toollist, reference >>>>>>distributions with chi-squared fits, etc.). While you are considering >>>>>>what trigger info needs to go into the new standard format I hope you >>>>>>will contact Yann about using (or adapting) his classes. It is better >>>>>>that we get the chance for input early in the process then rewrite >>>>>>everything from scratch. >>>>>> >>>>>>Do I understand correctly that this might be a wholesale reworking >>>>>>of the TMBTree (ie. it is still TMBTree in name only) or is it meant to >>>>>>be a small perturbation to that format? >>>>>> >>>>>>Thanks, >>>>>>Dugan. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>