-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Processing Request]: High Priority CalVal sites Request #55
Comments
Parameters should be similar to #53, e.g.
|
@gracebato just to confirm: You'd like these products delivered to ASF UAT correct? #53 did not request that. Also does it make a difference if we process these on our INT venue instead of PST? The difference is that if we process on PST we will keep the products in PST S3 forever; wherever INT S3 will be deleted clean every deployment. So the question is: do these products need to be archived in PST S3 forever or just delivering to ASF UAT sufficient? EDIT: After speaking with @LucaCinquini we decided that we will process on the PST venue and deliver to ASF UAT. |
We want to make sure that all frames process at least 4 years worth of data. So I'll process 2016-2021 covering 5 years. And if any of the frame still don't have 4 years worth of data, which is possible, I can extend the time range of those specific frames until that point. This is a bit of manual work but not too bad. I can predetermine which frames would not have 4 years worth of data in the first 5 calendar years using the historical database. |
Hi @philipjyoon all DISP-S1 products goes to UAT for all produced going forward. So request #53 would also go to UAT. Thanks. |
This request will be executed in 2 variations with one dependency. @gracebato please correct me if the understanding is incorrect:
|
Will use the following batch_proc for Variation 1
|
~65% complete as of now.
|
80% complete. The rate is about 1% per hour |
86% complete. There was some sort of JPL-wide network issue between last night and this morning. It seems to have just resolved and we've resumed processing.
|
Logging into the SCIFLO verdi machines and manually killing cloudwatch agent service which uses up one whole CPU core. This frees up the CPU core for the actual DISP-S1 processing. Next OPERA PCM release have a fix for this cloudwatch agent inefficiency.
|
Processing is complete. Here is the listing of all products |
Due to an operator error getting around a database file issue (which is now fixed going forward) we need to reprocess the last 4 runs of frame 8622 starting w the query job that generated the following batch ids: To do this, we will need to perform the following actions:
|
|
Reprocessing of frame 8622 last 4 runs have started |
Had to stop and restart because I hadn't deleted the compressed CSLCs from those 4 incorrect runs. We can use Tosca to delete unwanted Compressed CSLC records. In this case we want to delete all C-CSLC products that have the reference date |
Reprocessing of the last 4 runs of frame |
Processing started on 10-28. Still processing as of 10-30. |
Used the following to run this request again using the latest PCM release 3.1.0 final. Production version is 0.8
|
Running this ticket again using v0.9 product and PCM version 3.1.1. We are running several other requests and the following 3 frames are unique to this request: 18903, 28486, 33065 |
Venue
PST
Product
DISP-S1
SAS Version
No response
SDS Version
No response
Input Data
High Priority Frames:
Share Results
Additional Notes
F11116
andF08882
were already processed in: #53The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: