https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira This file is an XML representation of an issue en-us 8.3.4 803005 13-09-2019 https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira/browse/INSTRM-763 Instrument control development <p>When using CobraConfig it's usually necessary to join to mcsData purely to get the frameId. We should probably denormalise a little further (i.e. add frameId or maybe visitId), and take the opportunity to use the same name in the two tables (<tt>centroidx</tt> v. <tt>mcsCenter_x</tt>).</p> <p>We might want to remove the mcs pixel coordinates from CobraConfig all together; the two tables are used for different things, and can be easily joined when investigating e.g. camera distortions. </p> <p>While renaming columns it's worth thinking about using a Hungarian-style naming convention (e.g. adding including Pix in all pixel coordinates, and/or MM for all focal plane coordinates), especially when the two coordinate systems both appear in one table.</p> <p>Currently both tables include information about moves (one via <tt>moveId</tt> and one via <tt>iteration</tt>. We should reconsider this too; for example, if mcsData included the nominal position in MCS pixel coordinates we might well use it for convergence analysis rather than CobraConfig; I doubt if we would use both</p> INSTRM-763

Changes to schema for CobraConfig and mcsData

Story Normal Done Done Kiyoto Yabe rhl Sat, 7 Sep 2019 15:44:45 +0000 Tue, 24 Dec 2019 01:18:37 +0000 Tue, 24 Dec 2019 01:18:37 +0000 spt_operational_database 0 3 <p>I propose merging the <tt>cobra_config</tt> and <tt>mcs_data</tt> tables. It's not clear to me why the latter is separate. </p> <p>Historically, `mcsData` (currently `mcs_data`) was a table just containing an output of mcs_actor for only mcs measurement part, and `CobraConfig` (currently `cobra_config`) was motivated to be a table for only cobra movement part. </p> <p>In terms of the database normalization, I think we can merge these two because they have one-to-one correspondence, but I think we should separate two because some of the records in `cobra_config` such as pfi_center will be stored in a different process from the mcs measurement part. </p> <p>For your reference, you can find the current schema from here: <a href="https://github.com/Subaru-PFS/spt_operational_database/blob/new_schema_oct2019/PFS-DAT-IPM003002-01_pfs_schema.pdf" class="external-link" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/Subaru-PFS/spt_operational_database/blob/new_schema_oct2019/PFS-DAT-IPM003002-01_pfs_schema.pdf</a></p> <p> </p> <p>I agree with <a href="https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira/secure/ViewProfile.jspa?name=kiyoto.yabe" class="user-hover" rel="kiyoto.yabe">Kiyoto Yabe</a>; the information in the two tables is available at at different times.</p> <p>Ok, I see now - if the two tables are populated in two separate processes, the tables should remain separate.</p> Relates INSTRM-844 Development Rank 0|zy00b4: