Skip to content
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

DM-43077: Convert all tasks to use CalibrateImageTask outputs #119

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

parejkoj
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Copy link
Contributor

@taranu taranu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems fine as it's mostly just renaming (which I have no opinion on), assuming it passes. See individual comments.

@@ -55,14 +55,14 @@ HIPS_QGRAPH_FILE=$(mktemp)_hips.qgraph
trap 'rm -f $QGRAPH_FILE $INJECTION_QGRAPH_FILE $FARO_QGRAPH_FILE $RESOURCE_USAGE_QGRAPH_FILE \
$HIPS_QGRAPH_FILE' EXIT

# DM-46272: Change maxMeanDistanceArcsec to something smaller, so that it fails;
# even better, move those settings into DRP-ci_hsc.yaml!
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I was just going to ask, is there any good reason for these not to be in DRP-ci_hsc.yaml?

@@ -55,14 +55,14 @@ HIPS_QGRAPH_FILE=$(mktemp)_hips.qgraph
trap 'rm -f $QGRAPH_FILE $INJECTION_QGRAPH_FILE $FARO_QGRAPH_FILE $RESOURCE_USAGE_QGRAPH_FILE \
$HIPS_QGRAPH_FILE' EXIT

# DM-46272: Change maxMeanDistanceArcsec to something smaller, so that it fails;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Add TODO: ?

# set. This list is sensitive to the astrometry algorithms and dataset
# under consideration, so may require updating if either of those change
# in the context of this repository.
# DM-46272: not forcing these failures until we can handle partial outputs;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Add TODO: ?

@@ -29,48 +29,46 @@
from lsst.utils import getPackageDir


# DM-46272: not forcing these failures until we can handle partial outputs;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Add TODO: ?

instrument="HSC", detector=self.detector, visit=self.visit,
universe=self.butler.dimensions,
)

def tearDown(self):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why is this being removed? I understand that it's not really necessary to delete every primitive but deleting more heavyweight objects like self.butler seems justifiable rather than waiting for the GC to collect it whenever.

@@ -44,14 +44,6 @@ def setUp(self):
universe=self.butler.dimensions,
)

def tearDown(self):
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same as above.

class TestCalibrateOutputs(lsst.utils.tests.TestCase, MockCheckMixin):
"""Test the output data products of calibrate task make sense
class TestReprocessVisitImageOutputs(lsst.utils.tests.TestCase, MockCheckMixin):
"""Test the output data products of reprocessVisitImage task make sense.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Test that...

calibrateImage needs a tighter constraint here to produce a failure,
and it's only in one detector/visit.
Until we've fully figured out how to handle partial outputs in DRP
tasks downstream of calibrateImage, we can't use this to test failed
astrometry.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants