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/PIPE2D-271 DRP 2-D Pipeline <p>We are currently inconsistently using visit numbers and dates to name and compare against calibration files. The rule should be to consistently use visit numbers. Specifically:</p> <div class="preformatted panel" style="border-width: 1px;"><div class="preformattedContent panelContent"> <pre>BIAS/pfsBias-%(calibDate)s-0-%(arm)s%(spectrograph)1d.fits DARK/pfsDark-%(calibDate)s-0-%(arm)s%(spectrograph)1d.fits FLAT/pfsFiberFlat-%(calibDate)s-0-%(arm)s%(spectrograph)1d.fits FIBERTRACE/pfsFiberTrace-%(calibDate)s-0-%(arm)s%(spectrograph)1d.fits </pre> </div></div> <p>should be:</p> <div class="preformatted panel" style="border-width: 1px;"><div class="preformattedContent panelContent"> <pre>BIAS/pfsBias-%(visit0}06d-%(arm)s%(spectrograph)1d.fits DARK/pfsDark-%(visit0}06d-%(arm)s%(spectrograph)1d.fits FLAT/pfsFiberFlat-%(visit0}06d-%(arm)s%(spectrograph)1d.fits FIBERTRACE/pfsFiberTrace-%(visit0}06d-%(arm)s%(spectrograph)1d.fits </pre> </div></div> <p><tt>datamodel</tt> is already correct, except for <tt>FIBERTRACE</tt></p> <p> </p> <p>This will probably involve under-the-cover changes to registry/mapper parts.</p> PIPE2D-271

Use visit/visit0 numbers instead of dates for all calibration and DRP products.

Task Normal Won't Fix Won't Fix Unassigned cloomis Tue, 20 Feb 2018 20:35:40 +0000 Fri, 2 Nov 2018 17:45:50 +0000 Fri, 2 Nov 2018 17:45:50 +0000 0 1 <p>Duplicates <a href="https://pfspipe.ipmu.jp/jira/browse/PIPE2D-308" title="Include visit0 for bias, dark" class="issue-link" data-issue-key="PIPE2D-308"><del>PIPE2D-308</del></a>.</p> Development Rank 0|ii03xb: