(back to the list of all DM-SST meeting minutes)
Short : ls.st/dmsst
Zoom Meeting ID: 978 3912 1776
Dial closest IP: 188.8.131.52 (east coast) and 184.108.40.206 (west coast) then use the Zoom meeting ID 978 3912 1776 as the dialing extension.
For example: 978 3912 1776 @220.127.116.11 or: 18.104.22.168##978 3912 1776 Password: 512314
+1 346 248 7799 (US Toll)
+1 669 900 6833 (US Toll) Meeting ID: 936 2540 1560 International numbers available: https://gemini.zoom.us/u/adcUNrbXzS
- Steve Ritz
- Leanne Guy
- Colin Slater
- Eric Bellm
- Keith Bechtol
- Eli Rykoff
- Gregory Dubois-Felsmann
- Robert Lupton
- Melissa (travel)
- Jim Bosch
|Item||Who||Pre-Meeting Notes||Notes and Action Items|
No PST meeting last week
|Follow up on Catchup/retry processing and database structure|
Previous discussion at 2022-12-05 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes
Context: How do we handle / withdraw sources that result from bad processing, e.g ISR was bad or a large amount of junk DIASources and DIAObject in a visit.
Original proposal was to use the DIAObejct validity start/end ranges. DIAObjects will have a change in validity as they are expected to be replaced - this is not the same as saying that they are bad. New proposal is to add 2 new columns
GPDF: Bad DIASources can lead both to “purely bad" DIAObjects as well as to contamination of nearby existing "real” DIAObjects.
GPDF: What is the DIASource record unique key in this model? The model assumes a DIAObject has an immutable unique set of backlinks to DIASources - are these just deleted and replaced with new unique identifiers when reprocessed?
EB: Should get new identifiers
CTS: Will need to design a way to have unique sourceIds for reprocessing in any case - no way to make new sourceIds match old sourceIds
CTS: DIASource tells you what the DIAObject is - so one knows the processed time anyway but it is also good to have the "time_processed"
GPDF: Does not handle the case where a DIAObject is contaminated by bad processing
EB: If we reprocess we have to withdraw bad sources and the linkages will be removed in that process.
RHL: Subset of the general provenance problem. How do we manage the processings that contribute to a DRP? Does this solve this problem?
EB: Probably not because we are sending alerts and a user facing aspect not present in DRP.
GPDF: DRP does not have an identity preserving update in place.
CTS: Propose a discussion of the actual DRP use cases but is tangential here.
CTS: If we send a CCD back through processing, everything that the CCD touched has to be updated and we need that provenance in place.
GPDF: SSObject lack of validity ranges was an oversight in the original model
CTS: What are the images that went in and when was the orbit fitting run? Take off line and think through - are there 2 different timescales here. Assume that at time of orbit fitting that all images exist.
CTS: Adding time_processing is a win
Next meeting is:
RHL: How do we use the info from the AuxTel for calibrations - how much do we have to commission early. Current plan is when when LSSTCam comes on sky?
LPG: What does 'commission early' mean - aren't we commissioning now?
ER: I think the real issue here is "does the spectroscopy and atmosphere coming from AuxTel need to be part of DR1?" Not mission critical to have the AuxTel atmosphere for DR1 - nice to have but also not necessary to have 100% uptime
LPG: So it's a question of prioritizing items for commissioning.
KB: Analogous issue with the CBP for DR1
ER: Will we get all the CBP stuff together. Need the monochromatic laser on the flatscreen and that would get us filter scans
KB: Getting to the phase where we need a very clear definition of the steps from construction to operations. Staged process with multiple verification events proposed at the schedule workshop and we need a clear definition of what needs to be done, e.g AT data being fed into DRP processing - is this a requirements to begin the 10-yr survey
ER: AuxTel spectro-photometry - will be useful but not mission critical
RHL: Will we get a spectro-photometry system that is good enough - do we need to look at in-kind contributions?
List of SST tasks (Confluence)
|Description||Due date||Assignee||Task appears on|
|28 Feb 2022||Robert Lupton||2018-11-05 DM SST F2F Agenda and Meeting notes|
|31 Mar 2022||Gregory Dubois-Felsmann||2022-02-14 DM-SST Virtual F2F Agenda and Meeting notes|
|16 May 2022||Steve Ritz||2022-03-14 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|27 May 2022||Gregory Dubois-Felsmann||2021-01-11 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting notes|
|13 Jun 2022||Gregory Dubois-Felsmann||2022-05-09 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|25 Jul 2022||Eli Rykoff||2022-06-06 DM-SST VF2F Agenda and Meeting notes|
|12 Sep 2022||Melissa Graham||2022-08-15 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|26 Sep 2022||Steve Ritz||2022-09-12 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|31 Oct 2022||Gregory Dubois-Felsmann||2022-08-22 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|31 Dec 2022||Leanne Guy||2022-04-11 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|31 Dec 2022||Leanne Guy||2022-06-06 DM-SST VF2F Agenda and Meeting notes|
|28 Feb 2023||Eli Rykoff||2023-01-30 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|28 Feb 2023||Eric Bellm||2023-01-30 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|28 Feb 2023||Leanne Guy||2023-01-23 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|13 Mar 2023||Jim Bosch||2023-02-27 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|20 Mar 2023||Leanne Guy||2023-02-27 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|31 Mar 2023||Jim Bosch||2023-02-27 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|31 Mar 2023||Jim Bosch||2023-02-13 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|30 Apr 2023||Jim Bosch||2023-02-13 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|
|31 Aug 2023||Jim Bosch||2023-02-27 DM-SST Agenda and Meeting Notes|