skip to main content
10.1145/3170427.3188679acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
abstract

DebugAR: Mixed Dimensional Displays for Immersive Debugging of Distributed Systems

Published:20 April 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Distributed systems are very complex and in case of errors hard to debug. The high number of messages with non deterministic delivery timings, as well as message losses, data corruption and node crashes cannot be efficiently analyzed with traditional GUI tools. We propose to use immersive technologies in a multi-display environment to tackle these shortcomings. Our DebugAR approach shows a representation of the current systems state, message provenance, and the lifetime of participating nodes and offers layouting techniques. By providing a screen that shows a traditional text-log, we bridge the gap to conventional tools. Additionally, we propose an interactive 3D visualization of the message flow, combining an interactive tabletop with augmented reality using a head-mounted display. We are confident that our proposed solution can not only be used to analyze distributed system, but also for other time-dependent networks.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

lbw1713-file3.mp4

mp4

10.5 MB

References

  1. Jenny Abrahamson, Ivan Beschastnikh, Yuriy Brun, and Michael D. Ernst. 2014. Shedding Light on Distributed System Executions. In Proc. ICSE'14. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 598--599. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Apache Issues. 2017. Zookeper-335. http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-335. (2017). Accessed: 2017-12-11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Elisa Gonzalez Boix, Carlos Noguera, Tom Van Cutsem, Wolfgang De Meuter, and Theo D'Hondt. 2011. REME-D: A Reflective Epidemic Message-oriented Debugger for Ambient-oriented Applications. In Proc. SAC'11 (SAC '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1275--1281. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. D. Bonyuet, M. Ma, and K. Jaffrey. 2004. 3D visualization for software development. In Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Web Services, 2004. 708--715. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Lauren Bradel, Alex Endert, Kristen Koch, Christopher Andrews, and Chris North. 2013. Large High Resolution Displays for Co-located Collaborative Sensemaking: Display Usage and Territoriality. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 71, 11 (Nov. 2013), 1078--1088. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Darren Dao, Jeannie Albrecht, Charles Killian, and Amin Vahdat. 2009. Live Debugging of Distributed Systems. In Proce CC'09 (CC '09). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 94--108. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Niklas Elmqvist. 2011. Distributed User Interfaces: State of the Art. Springer London, London, 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Steven Feiner and Ari Shamash. 1991. Hybrid User Interfaces: Breeding Virtually Bigger Interfaces for Physically Smaller Computers. In Proc. UIST'91 (UIST '91). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 9--17. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Dennis Geels, Gautam Altekar, Scott Shenker, and Ion Stoica. 2006. Replay Debugging for Distributed Applications. In Pro. ATEC'06 (ATEC '06). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 27--27. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1267359.1267386. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Pooya Khaloo, Mehran Maghoumi, Eugene Taranta, David Bettner, and Joseph Laviola. 2017. Code Park: A New 3D Code Visualization Tool. In Proc. VISSOFT'17. IEEE, 43--53.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Ricardo Langner, Tom Horak, and Raimund Dachselt. 2017. VisTiles: Coordinating and Combining Co-located Mobile Devices for Visual Data Exploration. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 24, no. 1 (10 2017), 11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Tanakorn Leesatapornwongsa, Jeffrey F. Lukman, Shan Lu, and Haryadi S. Gunawi. 2016. TaxDC: A Taxonomy of Non-Deterministic Concurrency Bugs in Datacenter Distributed Systems. SIGPLAN Not. 51, 4 (March 2016), 517--530. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. J. C. Roberts. 2007. State of the Art: Coordinated Multiple Views in Exploratory Visualization. In Proc. CMV'07. 61--71. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Malte Weiss, Simon Voelker, Christine Sutter, and Jan Borchers. 2010. BendDesk: Dragging Across the Curve. In Proc. ITS'10 (ITS '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1--10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. C. Eric Wu, Anthony Bolmarcich, Marc Snir, David Wootton, Farid Parpia, Anthony Chan, Ewing Lusk, and William Gropp. 2000. From Trace Generation to Visualization: A Performance Framework for Distributed Parallel Systems. In Proc. SC'00 (SC '00). IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, Article 50. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=370049.370458 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. DebugAR: Mixed Dimensional Displays for Immersive Debugging of Distributed Systems

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI EA '18: Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2018
      3155 pages
      ISBN:9781450356213
      DOI:10.1145/3170427

      Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 20 April 2018

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • abstract

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI EA '18 Paper Acceptance Rate1,208of3,955submissions,31%Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader