Cond DB and HVS through our spectacles

Lee LuekingFermilab

Con DB Meeting, June 28, 2004

Background We are working on a set of database schemas

to be used to store HCAL test beam metadata. We have thought through the use cases, and

requirements and have a design for an HCAL Conditions DB (HCDB) which includes calibration (described in this talk) and for Slow Controls Monitoring information (not described here but simple).

We are very interested in comparing our ideas with yours (Cond DB) and apologize if we have not fully appreciated the work you have already done.

Schema for HCDB calibration

Schema for HCDB calibrationPed

or gain

Algorithm

Blob w/

calib info

Comparing Cond DB HVS w/ HCDB Hardware

HCDB is for a specific sub detector structure Cond DB HVS approach is generic.

Time HCDB uses run ranges for the test beam Cond DB HVS has IOV

Data HCDB is concerned about the relation of the data as it goes

in, as well as how it is used. Includes algorithm used. Cond DB HVS seems to be focused on access to the data.

Tagging Similar concept for both. HCDB is somewhat simpler with the constraints which run-

ranges impose.

Thoughts and Questions We looked at the Requirements and Analysis document from

Nov. 20, 2000. We feel there needs to be more specific use cases in order for us to understand if the proposed design satisfies the actual need.

In the domain decomposition picture (HVS paper, section 2.3), the regions overlap. What exactly do the overlaps indicate about the understanding of the problem?

Similarities are drawn between Cond DB problem and CVS. CVS is two dimensional (data and version) and the conditions have the additional dimension of time. It is not obvious that the concept of “head version” can be applied for conditions. One probably needs specific tag. All entries can be important for various purposes, current reconstruction, verifying previous result, etc.

Are slow controls monitoring included in ConDB?