Given a paragraph about cooking, and a set of conversational questions and answers about the paragraph, say whether the passage contains sufficient information to answer the follow-up question. Say Yes if it is answerable; otherwise, say No. The paragraph has the prefix 'CONTEXT:'. Each conversation question has a prefix `Q:` followed by the answer prefix `A:`, and the follow-up question has a prefix `FOLLOWUP_Q:`.

CONTEXT: Mast O Khiar, as you mention mainly consist of plain yogurt and cucumbers and most recipe do not require much more than that. Because of such, the shelf life for the yogurt product will be the shelf life of the yogurt itself. If it is a store bought yogurt, then the shelf life should be about 2 weeks in the refrigerator.Make sure to store the sauce in an air-tight container. Most tubberware should work. Those soup containers from Chinese takeout orders work perfectly.EDIT: After a bit of a debate in cooking chat, I decided to change my answer a little. The reason I said 2 week is because personally I had eaten 2 week old Mast O Khiar. However it could be recipe dependant so it could be different for a different recipe. However it is very easy to tell whether yogurt OR cucumber is bad.Mast O Khiar should have a very fresh/clean aroma. When yogurt turn bad, it releases a rancid smell. If it smells bad, dont eat it.If you see fuzzy mold it's a good idea to throw it out.  <sep>  Q: I made kubideh kabobs with saffron rice for my fiance and I last night, and it was a huge success. However, my fiance wished we had some mast o khiar (yogurt-cucumber sauce) to go with it, as what we would normally get from a kabob takeout place### Now, given that this is the first time Persian food has ever been made in this house, I have concerns about any reasonably sized batch of this yogurt sauce being consumed in time. A: Mast O Khiar, as you mention mainly consist of plain yogurt and cucumbers and most recipe do not require much more than that  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: how long might this be safely stored in a refrigerator?
Yes

CONTEXT: I have seen this happening more than once. While I don't know the whole theory behind it, each time it happened, there was something just below the hole, let's call it "the lump". What I think happens is that the lump is too heavy. When the batter below it tries to rise, it doesn't have the strength to push up the lump. This could be combined with differences in heat transfer throughout the batter vs. on the batter-lump transition in preventing rising (I am certain they exist, but I don't know whether they have an effect at all). The result is a hole where the batter didn't rise, surrounded by nicely risen batter. As to where the lump comes from: you say "chocolate and pear cake". If you have pear pieces in the batter, right under the surface, they can do this. I have certainly seen it happen when the recipe includes fruit pieces in the batter. If there are no pear pieces, my second guess is badly dissolved flour. The directions for this type of cake normally include folding the whites very gently, and generally erring on the side of too little whisking. This could contribute to uneven batter texture, resulting in lumps. In the second case, the cake may have some less-than-pleasant pieces, but will still be mostly good. If it is fruit, the holes are purely a cosmetic problem. So not much harm done either way, unless you are shooting for a prize at a baking competition.  <sep>  Q: I baked a chocolate and pear cake whose batter is made with yolks, sugar, butter, melted chocolate and amaretti, flour and baking powder and whisked whites. It was (not very evenly) divided in two layers, sandwiching a layer of pear pieces pre-cooked in rum.### My question is: what are the holes due to? A: I have seen this happening more than once. While I don't know the whole theory behind it, each time it happened, there was something just below the hole, let's call it "the lump  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: Uneven division of batter?
Yes

CONTEXT: The primary reason is definitely convenience. If you don't want skin and seeds in your sauce, then you have to do some work to avoid it. Yes, it's possible, e.g. passing through a food mill, or blanching and peeling plus retaining only the flesh, but having it already done is a whole lot easier.Passata is usually much thicker too, so it won't need as long a cooking time to reduce into a non-watery sauce as fresh tomatoes. On top of that, you don't have to worry about whether you can find good fresh tomatoes, e.g. if it's winter and they're out of season.Your two cases for comparison seem to overlook this: if you just chop and cook, you'll have skin and seeds in your sauce, as well as excess liquid to cook down, while if you use passata, you won't. (Also, for what it's worth, you'd need pretty giant tomatoes to get the equivalent of 3/4 cup of passata out of one tomato.)Of course, if you don't mind skin and seeds, it's also perfectly fine to simply cook fresh tomatoes and be done with it.Note that you can often get similar advantages from other canned tomato products. In the US, crushed tomatoes are far more common, and a roughly similar texture. (Peeled whole tomatoes, diced tomatoes, tomato sauce, and tomato paste can also be useful depending on what texture you're aiming for.)  <sep>  Q: What exactly is Passata? A: crushed tomatoes  Q: Is it better to use Passata instead of fresh tomatoes? A: The primary reason is definitely convenience  Q: Is the procedure that much more difficult to use fresh tomatoes instead of using Passata? A: f you don't want skin and seeds in your sauce, then you have to do some work to avoid it  Q: Fresh is usually better; however, is it really just a matter of convenience or is the taste effected? A: if you don't mind skin and seeds, it's also perfectly fine to simply cook fresh tomatoes and be done with it  <sep> FOLLOWUP_Q: When making real Ragu, what really is the specific difference between using Passata (so, for say 1kg of meat, a few cups of Passata, cooked-in for many hours as the last step)?

No