PATENT DOCUMENT

Publication Number: US-8086904-B2
Application Number: US-49590406-A
Country: US
Kind Code: B2

Title: Event-based setting of process tracing scope

Abstract:
Detecting an anomaly is disclosed. An indication that a computer system monitoring instrument is desired to provide as output a subset of the output data that it would produce if it were to remain on throughout a relevant period with no limit being placed on its output at any point during the relevant period is received. The instrument is configured to provide as output only the desired subset.

Claims:
1. A method of detecting an anomaly comprising:
 storing data associated with a master track, wherein the data in the master track corresponds to a sequence of one or more inputs associated with user interactions; 
 receiving an indication that a first computer system monitoring instrument is desired to begin monitoring a first resource of a computer system upon satisfaction of a start criterion during a replay of the master track; and 
 configuring the first instrument to begin monitoring performance of the first resource upon satisfaction of the start criterion during a replay of the master track, wherein monitoring performance includes collecting data associated with input to and output from the first resource; and 
 wherein the master track is replayed two or more times, and during each replay, the sequence of one or more inputs associated with user interactions is configured to be again input into the computer system to generate an output track, and wherein a difference, if any, is determined between a first output track associated with a first replay of the master track and a second output track associated with a second replay of the master track. 
 
     
     
       2. The method of  claim 1  wherein the first instrument is configured automatically. 
     
     
       3. The method of  claim 1  further comprising configuring the first instrument to stop performing monitoring based at least in part on a stop criterion. 
     
     
       4. The method of  claim 1  wherein an input associated with user interactions comprises an input to a computer system component. 
     
     
       5. The method of  claim 4  wherein the sequence of one or more inputs associated with user interactions is provided to the computer system component in the course of replaying the master track. 
     
     
       6. The method of  claim 4  wherein the computer system component comprises one or more of the following: an application; a process; a hardware component; a software component; a combination of one or more software components; a combination of one or more hardware components; and a combination of one or more software and one or more hardware components. 
     
     
       7. The method of  claim 1  wherein the first instrument is configured based at least in part on time. 
     
     
       8. The method of  claim 1  further comprising causing an indication to be displayed when an event that triggers the first instrument to start monitoring Occurs. 
     
     
       9. The method of  claim 1  wherein an activity associated with the start criterion is one that occurs during a period in which one or more of the following is performed with respect to a computer system component: monitoring, observing, analyzing, exercising, using, and playing back a master track of previously recorded inputs to the computer system component. 
     
     
       10. The method of  claim 9  wherein the computer system component comprises one or more of the following: an application; a process; a hardware component; a software component; a combination of one or more software components; a combination of one or more hardware components; and a combination of one or more software and one or more hardware components. 
     
     
       11. The method of  claim 1 , wherein the master track includes pre-recorded input to and output from the monitored computer system. 
     
     
       12. The method of  claim 1  wherein configuring the first instrument comprises configuring a filter. 
     
     
       13. The method of  claim 12  wherein the filter causes the first instrument to monitor a first event and ignore a second event. 
     
     
       14. A computer system comprising:
 a processor configured to:
 store data associated with a master track, wherein the data in the master track corresponds to a sequence of one or more inputs associated with user interactions; 
 receive an indication that a first computer system monitoring instrument is desired to begin monitoring a first resource of the computer system upon satisfaction of a start criterion during a replay of the master track; and 
 configure the first instrument to begin monitoring performance of the first resource upon satisfaction of the start criterion during a replay of the master track, wherein monitoring performance includes collecting data associated with input to and output from the first resource; and 
 wherein the master track is replayed two or more times, and during each replay, the sequence of one or more inputs associated with user interactions is configured to be again input into the computer system to generate an output track, and wherein a difference, if any, is determined between a first output track associated with a first replay of the master track and a second output track associated with a second replay of the master track; and 
 
 a memory coupled to the processor and configured to provide instructions to the processor. 
 
     
     
       15. The system of  claim 14  wherein the processor is further configured to configure the first instrument to stop performing monitoring based at least in part on a stop criterion. 
     
     
       16. The system of  claim 14  wherein the first instrument is configured based at least in part on time. 
     
     
       17. The system of  claim 14  wherein configuring the first instrument comprises configuring a filter. 
     
     
       18. The system of  claim 17  wherein the filter causes the first instrument to monitor a first event and ignore a second event. 
     
     
       19. A computer program product for detecting an anomaly, the computer program product being embodied in a non-transitory computer readable storage medium and comprising computer instructions for:
 storing data associated with a master track, wherein the data in the master track corresponds to a sequence of one or more inputs associated with user interactions; 
 receiving an indication that a first computer system monitoring instrument is desired to begin monitoring a first resource of the computer system upon satisfaction of a start criterion during a replay of the master track; 
 configuring the first instrument to begin monitoring performance of the first resource upon satisfaction of the start criterion during a replay of the master track, wherein monitoring performance includes collecting data associated with input to and output from the first resource; and 
 wherein the master track is replayed two or more times, and during each replay, the sequence of one or more inputs associated with user interactions is configured to be again input into the computer system to generate an output track, and wherein a difference, if any, is determined between a first output track associated with a first replay of the master track and a second output track associated with a second replay of the master track.

Description:
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
     Typical performance analysis, debugging, and similar tools (hereinafter referred to collectively as “tracing tools” and “monitoring” tools) help a user identify problems by, e.g., recording information about one aspect of the behavior of a process. Such tools often collect a voluminous amount of information, including information that is unrelated to helping detect the anomaly or anomalies being sought by the user. In addition to making it more difficult to locate the cause of a problem, the excessive amount of information collected and displayed to the user typically comes at a performance cost due to the resources consumed by such tracing tools. 
     Therefore, it would be desirable to have a better way to identify anomalies. 
    
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS 
       Various embodiments of the invention are disclosed in the following detailed description and the accompanying drawings. 
         FIG. 1  illustrates an embodiment of a system in which resource tracing is provided. 
         FIG. 2A  illustrates an embodiment of an interface to a tracing system. 
         FIG. 2B  is a flow chart illustrating an embodiment of a process for playing a master track. 
         FIG. 2C  illustrates an example of a debugger instrument. 
         FIG. 3  is a flow chart illustrating an embodiment of a process for recording and displaying event information. 
         FIG. 4A  illustrates an embodiment of an interface to a tracing system. 
         FIG. 4B  is a flow chart illustrating an embodiment of a process for displaying detail. 
         FIG. 5  is a flow chart illustrating an embodiment of a process for scoping an instrument. 
         FIG. 6  illustrates an embodiment of an interface to a tracing system. 
         FIG. 7A  is a flow chart illustrating an embodiment of a process for showing a difference between two or more tracks. 
         FIG. 7B  illustrates an embodiment of an interface to a tracing system. 
     
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION 
     The invention can be implemented in numerous ways, including as a process, an apparatus, a system, a composition of matter, a computer readable medium such as a computer readable storage medium or a computer network wherein program instructions are sent over optical or electronic communication links. In this specification, these implementations, or any other form that the invention may take, may be referred to as techniques. A component such as a processor or a memory described as being configured to perform a task includes both a general component that is temporarily configured to perform the task at a given time or a specific component that is manufactured to perform the task. In general, the order of the steps of disclosed processes may be altered within the scope of the invention. 
     A detailed description of one or more embodiments of the invention is provided below along with accompanying figures that illustrate the principles of the invention. The invention is described in connection with such embodiments, but the invention is not limited to any embodiment. The scope of the invention is limited only by the claims and the invention encompasses numerous alternatives, modifications and equivalents. Numerous specific details are set forth in the following description in order to provide a thorough understanding of the invention. These details are provided for the purpose of example and the invention may be practiced according to the claims without some or all of these specific details. For the purpose of clarity, technical material that is known in the technical fields related to the invention has not been described in detail so that the invention is not unnecessarily obscured. 
       FIG. 1  illustrates an embodiment of a system in which resource tracing is provided. In the example shown, system  100  includes one or more resources ( 110 - 120  in the example shown), including software applications or processes ( 110 ) and hardware resources such as a central processing unit ( 112 ), optical drives or other devices ( 114 ), memory ( 116 ), networking resources ( 118 ) and storage ( 120 ). Tracing system  102  is configured to monitor the behavior of resources  110 - 120  through one or more instruments  104 . 
     In the example shown, instruments  104  gather information about the resources and store at least a portion of that information in an event database  108 . A user, interacting with interface  106 , controls the instruments—specifying parameters such as which resource(s) to monitor for which type(s) of and/or range(s) of behavior. As described in more detail below, interface  106  displays to the user the information collected by instruments  104  in a manner that allows the user to visually correlate the information from multiple instruments at the same time. 
     The term “resource” as used herein refers to any feature of a computing environment that can be monitored by one or more instruments and is not limited to the resources shown in  FIG. 1 . Other examples of resources include aspects such as power consumption, component temperature, etc. 
     In some embodiments, the infrastructure provided by portions of tracing system  102  is located on and/or replicated across a plurality of servers rather than the entirety of tracing system  102  being collocated on a single platform. Such may be the case, for example, if the contents of event database  108  are vast. 
       FIG. 2A  illustrates an embodiment of an interface to a tracing system. The example shown is an implementation of interface  106 , as rendered in a window. 
     In the example shown, interface  106  includes an instrument selection tool box  220 , from which a user can select one or more instruments. In the example shown, the user has selected to view all available instruments ( 228 ) and is presented with such instruments in region  222  accordingly. If the user selected to view a subset of available instruments, such as just those instruments associated with memory or input/output resources, the appropriate instruments would be shown in region  222  accordingly. A user can also search for a particular instrument through the search box displayed in region  224 . 
     A user indicates one or more instruments with which to monitor resources by selecting them as appropriate from region  222 , which causes the selected instruments to appear in region  226  of interface  106 . In the example shown, a user is attempting to debug an application, “ShowMyPlace.app,” which occasionally malfunctions. ShowMyPlace.app is a client server application that, when a user types in an address into a form, retrieves satellite images of the address and surrounding area from an online map server. Occasionally, the application fails to display images, however, it appears to work correctly the majority of the time. 
     To debug the application, the user has selected to use four instruments ( 202 - 208 ) to monitor resources used in conjunction with the execution of ShowMyPlace.app. One reason that images may be occasionally failing to load is because of a memory fault. The user has selected to use the raw memory instrument ( 202 ), a memory analysis tool, accordingly. The problem may also be located within the core image framework, which permits the compositing and manipulation of images. Thus, the user has also selected to use the core image instrument ( 204 ). The user has added a network instrument ( 206 ) because it is possible that the problem is a drop-off in network traffic. Finally, the user has added a disk instrument ( 208 ), in case the problem is that the images being received from the map server are failing to be cached correctly. 
     Also shown in region  226  is a master track control  212 . A user indicates that interactions with one or more computer system components are to be recorded by selecting the record button  240  located in the master track control  212  or the control located in region  218  of interface  106 . As used herein, the terms “component” and “computer system component” refer to one or more hardware, software, or combined hardware and software components and/or modules of a computer system, and may in some embodiments include a set of subcomponents and/or sub-modules distributed over more than one physical computer system or “box”. Examples of computer system components include, without limitations, software applications and/or modules, other processes, and hardware devices such as network interface cards, processors, and input devices such as a mouse or keyboard. Typically, the interactions with the one or more computer system components are ones that the user believes that, when taken at least some of the time, lead to one or more anomalies. Interactions—e.g., user gestures or other input made by a user, application, process, system, etc. via an input device and/or interface, and/or the direct or indirect effect and/or consequences of such inputs on the one or more computer system component(s) and/or other components of a monitored system—are displayed as they occur in time in region  214  of interface  106 , also referred to herein as master track  214 . The master track can be erased, e.g., by selecting erase button  242  of interface  106 . Additional operations on the master track, such as pausing, replaying, and looping the master track can also be taken through the controls shown in region  218 . 
     Time bar  243  and time marker  238  are used to correlate information shown in region  210  (including master track  214 ). By sliding zoom control  216 , the user can specify the time increments displayed by time bar  243  and by sliding view control  244 , the user can specify the slice of time for which information is shown in region  210 . 
     Each of the instruments listed in region  226  includes one or more controls, such as controls  230 - 236 . With them, the user can specify aspects such as whether to remove the instrument from the list of selected instruments ( 230 ) and whether the instrument should be monitoring all, none, or a portion of the resource(s) ( 232 ,  234  and described in more detail below). Also as described in more detail below, if the user causes the activity recorded in the master track to be run multiple times, in various embodiments the user can specify whether or not to show instrument information for each of the runs, for a particular run of interest, for a most recent run, for a current run, and/or concurrently for any one or more past and/or current runs by, e.g., selecting the appropriate drop-down control ( 236 ). 
     In the example shown, the user has recorded one set of interactions with ShowMyPlace.app, each represented in master track  214  by a marker. For example, approximately two seconds after starting the ShowMyPlace.app application, the user gave mouse control to a “By city” dropdown in anticipation of selecting the user&#39;s city from a list. Approximately 3.75 seconds after starting the application, the user selected “Atherton” as the city in which the user lives. At approximately 10.75 seconds after starting the application, the user selected “California” from a dropdown. 
     When the user selects the play control from region  218 , the interactions recorded in master track  214 —e.g., a sequence of user gestures and/or inputs—will be provided, without any additional actions on the part of the user, to ShowMyPlace.app. Additionally, and as described in more detail below, the selected instruments ( 202 - 208 ) will capture and display output in region  210 , in the form of one or more tracks corresponding with each run for each instrument. 
       FIG. 2B  is a flow chart illustrating an embodiment of a process for playing a master track. The process begins at  252  when a master track is recorded. In some embodiments, the master track is recorded with respect to a single application, such as the ShowMyPlace.app application for which a master track was recorded at  252  as described in conjunction with  FIG. 2A . A master track capturing a work flow that includes multiple applications can also be recorded at  252 . For example, suppose that whenever a user attempts to view an email attachment in a mail client with an external viewer, the attachment is corrupted. In such a scenario, the master track recorded at  252  will include interactions with both the mail client application, as well as the external viewer application. 
     At  254 , one or more instrument selections is received. For example, when the user selects instruments by interacting with region  222  shown in  FIG. 2A , those selections are received at  254 . 
     In some embodiments, collections of instruments are pre-selected into one or more templates that are loaded at  254 , rather than or in addition to selecting individual instruments in region  222 . Templates may be specifically composed, e.g., to identify and seek out particular problems. For example, in some embodiments custom templates are defined that bundle tools most applicable to particular applications that a company produces. Thus, in the case of a word processing application, performance related instruments such as those monitoring CPU usage, memory consumption, etc. may be pre-selected in a template, while networking instruments are not. In the case of a web browser application, network, image manipulation, and disk usage instruments may be included in a template, while an instrument to monitor interfaces such a universal serial bus (USB) interface are not. 
     In some cases, templates include collections of instruments related to a particular category of resource. For example, templates may exist for each of the subsets listed in tool box  220  (e.g., input/output, user experience, etc.) 
     In some embodiments, users or other third parties are permitted to create their own instruments, such as by adapting existing tools such as performance analysis tools and debuggers to conform with an applicable instrument application programming interface (API) to tracing system  102 . For example, by including a battery life instrument and instruments that, e.g., track the brightness of a screen, the number of times information is written to disc, and the usage of a network card, a user will be more readily able to correlate battery depletion with its precise cause or causes. By including debugging information in tracing system  102 , the user will be able to visually discover, e.g., how much memory is allocated between two break points, when a particular variable changes, etc.  FIG. 2C  illustrates an example of a debugger instrument. The instrument makes use of the GNU debugger, GDB. In the example shown, watchpoints  282 ,  284 , and  286  indicate where variables have changed. Checkpoints  288  and  290  represent points to which the debugger can be rewound. Breakpoints  292  and  294  indicate points in time when the debugger was stopped. 
     At  256  in  FIG. 2B , the track recorded at  252  is replayed. In the example shown in  FIG. 2A , at  256  tracing system  102  would cause the ShowMyPlace.app application to execute, feeding to the application the appropriate user interactions (such as selecting options from a drop down menu) as previously recorded at  252 . As described in more detail below, also at  256 , any instruments configured to monitor one or more resources do so during replay of the activity recorded at  252 , and their respective outputs are displayed, such as in region  210  of  FIG. 2A . 
     In some embodiments, the master track recorded at  252  is recorded by a first user and played back at  256  by a second user. Such may be the case, for example, in a quality assurance scenario or customer support scenario in which a first user records the occurrence of an anomaly, but the debugging process is ultimately be performed by a second user. Additionally, in some embodiments, recording the master track at  252  and playing it back at  256  occur at non-contemporaneous times. For example, a user attempting to debug a program on a Friday afternoon may record and save the master track, but then replay the master track (resuming the debugging project) Monday morning. Similarly, in some embodiments, recording the master track is a continuous process—for example, 24 hours worth of information is recorded and stored at  252  at any given time and space is made by overwriting the recorded track as needed. 
       FIG. 3  is a flow chart illustrating an embodiment of a process for recording and displaying event information. The process shown in  FIG. 3  may be used to implement a portion of the processing performed at  256  of  FIG. 2B . 
     At  302 , the output of one or more instruments is listened for. In the example shown, the instruments listened for are those received in portion  254  of the process shown in  FIG. 2B . As described in more detail below, which instrument output is listened for at  302  can be configured with finer granularity in some embodiments. 
     In some embodiments, instruments indicate that events for which they are configured to monitor are occurring by producing an appropriate output. In the example described in conjunction with  FIG. 2A , the ten user interactions recorded in master track  214  are associated with causing potentially millions of events to occur in environment  100 . 
     In some embodiments, when an event is observed by an instrument ( 304 ), the event is stored in event database  108  as an event object ( 306 ). Each event object includes certain common types of meta-information such as a field indicating the time at which the event occurred, the type of event, stack trace, in which process the event occurred, and on which CPU the event occurred. 
     Event objects in some embodiments can be configured to include and/or to include selectively for certain instruments extended data fields which are populated by the instrument with instrument-specific information. For example, when a file access event is observed, in addition to the common fields being populated at  306 , information such as what changes were made to the file, which application was responsible for the changes, etc., are also stored. Also at  306 , information received from instruments is rendered and displayed to the user through interface  106  as appropriate. 
     In some cases, the same event is observed by multiple instruments. For example, and as described in more detail below, the two instances of the same instrument may be tuned (scoped) differently. A first file access instrument may be scoped to only listen for file access associated with text files, whereas a second file access instrument may be scoped to listen for all file accesses. Whenever a text file is accessed, both instruments will see the same event and each will record and/or otherwise provide independently of the other output associated with the event. In some embodiments, two instruments that respond to the same event each may supply their own custom meta-information for the event. In some embodiments, events are correlated, if such correlation is recognized during master track playback and/or at runtime, and a single event object used to represent a particular event. Each instrument then instantiates and populates with its own instrument-specific data for the event an instrument-specific event object that is then linked to the main, common object representing the event in the tracing system. In some embodiments, each instrument sub-classes the main event object and adds additional attributes as required to store instrument-specific data about the event. In some such embodiments, such sub-classed event objects share the same timestamp as the main event object, and the timestamp is used to correlate the main and instrument-specific event objects. 
     The process ends at  308  when activity associated with the playback of master track  214  ends. As described in more detail below, if only a portion of master track  214  has been selected for playback, the process shown in  FIG. 3  ends when activity associated with the scoped portion of master track  214  completes. 
       FIG. 4A  illustrates an embodiment of an interface to a tracing system. In the example shown, a user has replayed master track  214 , which was recorded at  252  of  FIG. 2B . While replay has finished in the example shown in  FIG. 4A , the same interface is used in some embodiments to display instrument readings in real time during replay of the master track. Output from each of the four instruments received at  254  of  FIG. 2B  is shown in region  210  of interface  106 . The information is shown rendered in a variety of formats. For example, the equalizer-style brush employed by the network instrument quickly indicates peak consumption of network resources by coloring spikes in network traffic differently from typical values. Similarly, brushes can make use of the vertical axis to indicate information such as multiple threads and depths of calls. For example, in the case of a dual CPU environment, a CPU instrument may display the CPU usage of each respective CPU in one of two parallel tracks. File opens can be represented with indicators occurring in the top half of a track, with file closes represented in the bottom half, etc. 
     In some cases an instrument may only support a single brush or type of view. In other cases, a user may select different views of the same information, such as by right clicking on the information shown in region  210  or by selecting an instrument control. Other examples of brushes include flowing graphs, histograms, timelines with flags, and thumbnails of the user interface associated with the application or applications being monitored (such as in the case of the master track). 
     The information shown in a track in region  210  will typically be a very high level view of information collected by the track&#39;s respective instrument. Individual pixels may represent one or more events. A user can select to view instrument specific detail for each instrument as applicable. For example, time marker  238  is currently located at 6.65 seconds. If a user clicks on a particular instrument, such as the internal disk instrument, information such as statistics associated with the internal disk instrument will be displayed in region  402  of  FIG. 4A . In the case of the internal disk instrument, such statistics may include the number of total files opened or closed, number of files written, etc. 
     Also upon selection by a user of an instrument, a detailed view of disk-related events occurring at/around 6.65 seconds into the execution of ShowMyPlace.app will be rendered in region  404  of interface  106 . For example, the specific names of files open at time 6.65 may be displayed in region  404  and/or particular blocks or sectors in use. In some embodiments, what detail to show (e.g., just file names) is customizable. For example, in the case of a debugger instrument such as GDB (the GNU debugger), one detail view may include the name of the person responsible for committing the portion of code currently executing, whereas another detail view may show the source code itself. 
       FIG. 4B  is a flow chart illustrating an embodiment of a process for displaying detail. The process begins at  452  when an indication is received that a portion of a trace has been selected. For example, suppose a user has set time marker  238  shown in  FIG. 4A  to 6.65 seconds and double clicked on internal disk. At  452 , a selection of “6.65 seconds” and “internal disk” would be received. Suppose instead that a user had selected a larger portion of the internal disk track at  452 , such as by dragging time marker  238  or entering a range (via a begin and end time) into interface  106 . In such case, a range such as “6.65-6.90” seconds and “internal disk” would be received at  452 . 
     At  454 , instrument specific detail for the portion of the trace specified at  452  is displayed, such as in region  404  of interface  106  as shown in  FIG. 4A . 
       FIG. 5  is a flow chart illustrating an embodiment of a process for scoping an instrument. The process begins at  502  when it is determined whether any selected instruments have associated start or stop criteria. In the example shown in  FIG. 4A , the instruments have been “scoped.” They were each instructed to begin monitoring for events at three seconds into runtime. One reason for scoping instruments is to avoid recording unnecessary information. Often, a great deal of extra information is generated at the beginning of the execution of an application. By instructing the instruments to ignore the first few seconds of runtime, unwanted noise can be reduced accordingly. Thus, in the example shown in  FIG. 4A , at  504 , an indication that a start criteria (start all instruments at  3  seconds) was received at  504 . A stop criteria was also received at  504  in the example shown in  FIG. 4A  (stop all instruments at 12 seconds). 
     Other criteria instead of or in addition to time can be used to scope the starting and stopping of an instrument. For example, a first instrument can be scoped to turn on or turn off based on the output of a second instrument. If the temperature rises above a certain amount (as determined by a temperature instrument), a power consumption instrument or a fan usage instrument can be activated by tracing system  102 . Similarly, a memory analysis instrument can be configured to turn on when a particular file is opened and to turn off when it is closed. 
     The start/stop criteria tested for at  502  can also be indicated in conjunction with the master track. For example, at  502  in the example shown in  FIG. 4A , the instruments could also be instructed to start recording after the user has given mouse focus to the “by city” dialogue box, and thus also avoiding the initial noise of application startup. 
     At  506 , if no start/stop criteria is received at  502 , the instrument is instructed to remain on. Scoping can also include having an instrument ignore particular events or types of events even while on. At  508  it is determined whether one or more filters ought to be applied to the events observed by the instruments (whether on for the entire playback ( 506 ), or on for only a portion of the playback ( 504 )). 
     Examples of filters that can be received at  508  include instructions to monitor for file accesses only where the file is of a particular type. Filters can also be set that cause the instrument to mark when particular events occur. For example, a user can configure the internal disk instrument to display a flag in interface  106  whenever a particular file exceeds a particular size or whenever a file having a prefix of “tmp-” remains open for longer than ten minutes. If a filter is received, at  510  the applicable limits are implemented and the instrument records and displays the appropriate subset of output as applicable. If no filter is received, all instrument output is recorded and displayed for the duration of the time that the instrument is configured to be on. 
       FIG. 6  illustrates an embodiment of an interface to a tracing system. The example shown is a representation of interface  106  as rendered after the master track recorded at  252  of  FIG. 2B  is replayed five times. The user has selected to view the output of all five runs as recorded by the core image instrument ( 602 ) by selecting drop down  236 . The raw memory, network, and internal disk output shown is from the most recent run in the example shown and in various embodiments is configurable by the user (such as by allowing the user to see the first run, an average across all five runs, all five runs concurrently, etc.) 
     In the example shown, the master track was played five times because the user selected the “play” button from controls  218  a total of five times. Other methods may also be used to indicate that multiple runs of the master track are to be played, such as by entering the number of times the master track ought to be played into a dialogue, or by making use of the “loop” control shown at  218 . In the example shown, additional information is presented to the user when drop down  236  is selected. This information includes the total amount of processing time spent on image-related resources. As shown, at each run, the core image instrument recorded different lengths of image processing time, with the first run consuming the least amount of time and the fourth run consuming the most amount of time. 
       FIG. 7A  is a flow chart illustrating an embodiment of a process for showing a difference between two or more tracks. The process begins at  702  when output from two or more runs of the master track are received. For example, the tracks shown at  602  in  FIG. 6  are received at  702 . In some embodiments, tracks are received by performing a query of event database  108 . In other cases, tracks are received sequentially, in real time. 
     At  704 , it is determined whether there are any differences between the tracks received at  702 . One way of determining differences is to examine the meta-information of events with which the tracks are associated. For example, in a first run, a total of three file opens may occur, while in the second run, a total of four file opens may occur. By examining the meta-information associated with the events recorded by an instrument during two different runs, differences in execution can be detected. In some embodiments, such as when one or more flag filters such as those described in conjunction with  FIG. 6  are set, tracing system  102  evaluates flagged events for differences rather than or in addition to examining the event object meta-information described above. Event database  108  in some embodiments is a relational database such as PostgreSQL, Oracle, or MySQL, and accepts SQL compatible (e.g. SQL3) queries. Thus, in some instances, advanced queries are used to determine differences. 
     In various embodiments, instruments are responsible for analyzing their respective data and recording summary information, such as the summary information displayed in region  402  of inter face  106  as shown in  FIG. 4A . In such a case, the analysis is stored in event database  108  or another appropriate location as applicable and tracing system  102  is configured to look for the summary information when performing portion  704  of the process shown in  FIG. 7A . 
     In some embodiments, differences are determined by the instrument. In other instances, differences are determined centrally, such as by dedicated component of tracing system  102 . 
     At  706 , the tracks received at  702  are displayed to a user in a manner that shows differences detected at  704 . In some embodiments, the analysis performed at  704  is time or otherwise resource intensive. In such a case, the tracks received at  702  may be displayed immediately to a user at  706  along with an overlay or other user interaction that indicates to the user that processing is underway and any differences determined at  704  will be displayed when they are available. 
     In some embodiments, the tracks received at  702  and compared at  704  are tracks recorded by two or more different instruments during a single replay of the master track. Differences are determined according to rules specified to tracing system  102  such as by an administrator, e.g., via a graphical and/or other user interface and/or in a configuration file. One example of such a rule is to visually indicate any time that a temperature exceeds a certain value and that a particular file is open by visually marking both the temperature and the file open event in the output of the respective instruments monitoring such events. 
       FIG. 7B  illustrates an embodiment of an interface to a tracing system. In the example shown, a user has caused multiple executions of the master track to run such as by taking the actions described in conjunction with  FIG. 6 . The user has indicated that differences are to be determined ( 704 ) and the results of the difference determination are displayed at  702 . The core image instrument is aware of information such as the size of images that it created and which filters it applied to those images. In the example shown, executions of the same set of instructions, such as “fetch image; resize image; display image” resulted in different sized images being displayed in different runs. This information is captured by the core image instrument, such as at  306  of the process shown in  FIG. 3 . The information is thus available for receipt at  702  and evaluation at  704  of the process shown in  FIG. 7A . 
     Although the foregoing embodiments have been described in some detail for purposes of clarity of understanding, the invention is not limited to the details provided. There are many alternative ways of implementing the invention. The disclosed embodiments are illustrative and not restrictive.

Metadata:
Filing Date: 20060728
Publication Date: 20111227
Grant Date: 20111227
Priority Date: 20060728
Inventors: GOLDSTEIN THEODORE C.
LEWALLEN STEPHEN R.
DRUKMAN MAXWELL O.
Assignee: APPLE INC
CPC Classifications: [{"code": "G06F11/3672", "inventive": true, "first": true, "tree": "[]"}, {"code": "G06F11/3672", "inventive": true, "first": true, "tree": "[]"}]
Family ID: 39464743