[INSTRM-1448] Add table for fiducial fibre matches Created: 15/Nov/21 Updated: 17/Dec/21 Resolved: 21/Nov/21 |
|
| Status: | Done |
| Project: | Instrument control development |
| Component/s: | spt_operational_database |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | None |
| Type: | Task | Priority: | Normal |
| Reporter: | karr | Assignee: | Kiyoto Yabe |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | EngRun | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Reviewers: | karr |
| Description |
|
As discussed earlier, there needs to be an additional table in the database which records the matching of the fiducial fibres to the measured spots, ie, an analogue to cobra_match for fiducial fibres. Currently, the spots matched with cobras are recorded in cobra_match, but the ff matches are not recorded anywhere. |
| Comments |
| Comment by Kiyoto Yabe [ 15/Nov/21 ] |
|
OK, I will make `fiducial_fiber_match` table similarly to `cobra_match`. We do not need `fiducial_fiber_target` table, right? |
| Comment by karr [ 15/Nov/21 ] |
|
Right, the fiducials don't move. |
| Comment by Kiyoto Yabe [ 16/Nov/21 ] |
|
OK. Then, what columns do we need in `fiducial_fiber_match` table?
pfi_center_x_mm = Column(REAL, comment='Actual x-position on the PFI [mm]')
pfi_center_y_mm = Column(REAL, comment='Actual y-position on the PFI [mm]')
, but we do not need them as well? What is the usage of the table? |
| Comment by karr [ 16/Nov/21 ] |
|
Thinking about it, the fiducial fibre positions in mm are already known and included in the database in the fiducial fibre table. What this table needs is possibly just fibre_id and spot_id. With that, we can link back to mcs_data to get the centroid information and see how the matching process worked, and the brightness of the fibres. |
| Comment by Kiyoto Yabe [ 16/Nov/21 ] |
|
OK, I removed pfi_center_x/y_mm. |
| Comment by Kiyoto Yabe [ 17/Nov/21 ] |
|
I have pushed the change. Could you review that, karr ? |
| Comment by karr [ 17/Nov/21 ] |
|
I would remove the mcs_frame_id column, as that can be derived from pfs_visit_id and iteration, but otherwise it looks good. |
| Comment by cloomis [ 21/Nov/21 ] |
|
For the sake of 1-1 matching with the cobra_match table I think we should keep that column: the current schema looks good to me. The table would be handy... |
| Comment by Kiyoto Yabe [ 21/Nov/21 ] |
|
I think the discussion converged, so I merge the current one and close this ticket. |