Relax FileCatalogOptionsHandler constraint on when SAM metadata are required.
This issue is related to issue #4661.
FileCatalogOptionsHandler has some more problematic features. If you specify command line options
FileCatalogOptionsHandler inappropriately insists that you specify sam output options used by service
FileCatalogMetadata and module
RootOutput. Here is a typical error:
OptionsHandler caught a cet::exception calling art::FileCatalogOptionsHandler::doProcessOptions() ---- Configuration BEGIN SAM metadata information is required -- missing metadata: --sam-application-family --sam-application-version --sam-file-type --sam-data-tier ---- Configuration ENDIt complains even if there is no reason to include these command line options. It complains even if your job file does not include either FileCatalogMetadata or RootOutput (i.e., if you have an analysis job that only makes histograms; above output came from such a job).
In any case, I don't think
IFFileTransfer should care how you configure
RootOutput. Maybe you aren't planning on storing your output files in sam, or maybe you are generating your own metadata without using
#1 Updated by Christopher Green about 7 years ago
- Tracker changed from Bug to Feature
- Subject changed from FileCatalogOptionsHandler problems to Relax FileCatalogOptionsHandler constraint on when SAM metadata are required.
- Category set to Metadata
- Experiment MicroBooNE added
- Experiment deleted (
- SSI Package art added
- SSI Package deleted (
I have moved this issue to the feature tracker, and made the subject more explicit.
The constraint that SAM metadata are compulsory if SAM input is specified is a user requirement, not a bug. I can't imagine objections to relaxing the constraint in the case of no specified output modules, but I think anything more than that would have to be discussed with everyone. I believe this requirement originally came from NOvA. We should try to discuss this at a stakeholder meeting.
#3 Updated by Christopher Green almost 7 years ago
- Status changed from New to Feedback
We would like to schedule this for discussion at a meeting where Andrew, Marc M. and any other interested parties from NOvA or elsewhere may be present. Hopefully this can be a Stakeholder meting, but if a separate meeting is necessary it can be arranged.