ZoomCharts Co-Founder and CTO Viesturs Zariņš gave a highly successful presentation at XXVII DevClub.lv on January 15th, 2015 at the Microsoft Latvia office. DevClub.lv is a community of Latvian IT specialists that gather at monthly events to host free talks and presentations. Through them, the local IT community can share knowledge and experience, and can network and communicate on everything information technology-related.
Take a look at this overview of Zariņš’ PowerPoint presentation, and discover why, unmatched in both functionality and speed, ZoomCharts is the world’s most interactive data visualization software:
You can download full PowerPoint presentation here:
It’s really hard to talk about ZoomCharts until you see how it’s working. So, we are doing charts. But we are doing interactive charts. You can take the chart and move it around, you can zoom in, and it’s very interactive and shows the data. Basically, we provide visualization for large amounts of data and in a very interactive way.
Usually, with normal charts, what you get is a picture. We start with a picture and go into the data. To show some more examples, we have a pie chart, a data-driven chart. So we can drill down and see more data, and we can go even deeper, and we can go back. We are building charts for data exploration.
ZoomCharts is not another HTML5 charts library. We are doing interactive stuff, we are doing it fast, and focusing on touch, and working with big data. That’s the product.
How did we get here? It all started 20 or so years ago, when there was DOS6. The story was pretty simple back there. You had a 320x240 screen with 80 bits per pixel. And you just wrote whatever you wanted on those pixels. Windows came and basically everything went away. It was tricky and hardware-dependent.
Web changes the scene again. Graphics is fun again. We can do what we did in the old times, but we can do it a lot faster because we have graphics acceleration on pretty much every device.
With new stuff comes new challenges. There are many devices and every device has its own browser and capabilities and resolutions, and performance varies a lot. That’s what we are working with right now, and that’s the main challenge.
In terms of graphics, we work on three things: Canvas, SVG, and WebGL. Canvas is very fast on every device. SVG is very nice because of CSS. You can style it, you can animate it because it scales nicely, but it is slow. It doesn’t work with interactions. For the chart to work interactively, you have to keep the frame rate at least 30 frames per second. Performance is the main target we’re looking at. WebGL is very nice but still under 50% of devices support WebGL.
We chose Canvas. It’s a very simple interface. You get a pixel buffer, and you can just paint on it. There are three kinds of operations: you can paint shapes, text, and images. It is very simple, and all devices implement it the same way. So far we haven’t encountered any device that has implemented canvas in a way that differs from the others. Basically if a device supports Canvas, then we are good. Canvas is very mathematical. You have coordinates everywhere. You have to do your own animations. It’s kind of tricky because you need to do a lot of the housekeeping yourself, but it is also a benefit. You can do interactivity very easily. It’s very easy to control animations. Another thing that’s easy on Canvas is graceful degradation. You can remove shadows, and performance will go up. It’s easy to measure the frame rate because you’re painting every frame. You measure frame rate and you decide what you want to paint to get the performance you need. All the changes in the view are free. That’s different if you compare it to SVG or WebGL where you have to add or remove elements from the scene. Here if you want to change something, you just execute or don’t execute some of your code, and that is a big benefit for interactivity, because in interactivity you basically do big gestures, and it completely changes the scene, and you don’t want your chart to freeze for a few frames to update the changes—you want it to be really fast.
We chose a few third party libraries. Raphael is for vector graphics, Hammer.js is for input, like mouse and touch detection, Leaflet is for maps, and Moment.js is for printing and parsing date and time. As we developed, we wanted as few libraries as possible. We already got rid of the first two and implemented them ourselves. The trick is, as you want the functionality to be as seamless and good as possible, you quickly get into limitations of the library because the library is written for the use case of the developer. The library and your use case will most certainly differ in subtle ways and these ways get into your development process as you go. Currently we are looking to rewrite Leaflet, but not at the moment. Our experience is that third party libraries are a great way to start early on, but as you go, you usually replace them.
A few challenges I would like to talk about: responsive design—so there are lots of things we can solve with responsive design, but it’s still a struggle. Because this is Canvas, we have to do everything ourselves, and we have to rely on CSS. This is the downside of Canvas—that you really have to do everything yourself. We made a module that would make the charts adjust to the size of the container. We used a very weird hack. It works, but it is not easy.
Another thing is that Canvas is a pixel buffer, so if you zoom in, you get something very pixelated. We have solved half of the problem using devicePixelRatio value that is supported on every browser we have tested. One thing is that we don’t support Internet Explorer below version 9 because Canvas is not supported there. So that’s our biggest limitation. You can use X Canvas but it’s very slow, and you don’t want to use X Canvas. On every browser that supports Canvas, you have this devicePixelRatio and you can just upscale the canvas, and it looks very nice and native, like vector graphics, basically. That works for desktop. For mobile and touch zooming, it doesn’t work. And so far, there is no way to detect touch zoom on browsers. There is one website that has about 10 variants on how to test device zoom, basically how to test what the size of the actual screen pixel is, and none of these methods really work on touch zooms. Another thing is that if you zoom in really big and if you have retina screens, you can get a canvas size beyond 2048. At that point, hardware acceleration just switches off. That’s pretty consistent on Macs. On Windows devices, it differs. And on mobile devices it is pretty consistent. At this resolution, hardware acceleration switches off and goes back to software rendering. Obviously we don’t want to do that. Currently we just limit the number of pixels in the canvas. The canvas can get bigger, but the real number of pixels is smaller, and the browser just upscales. That way we keep the hardware acceleration.
DOM is very slow. If you want to go at 60 frames per second, then updating DOM elements in every frame doesn’t really work. Currently because of this info popup on time chart, if you want to update it on every frame, it takes 30% of the full load. 70% is painting the chart, 30% is generating DOM. Not just regenerating everything, but just updating the position. We try to avoid doing DOM updates as much as possible. Almost everything is Canvas. We have a toolbar that’s DOM, and this info popup and context menu—that’s DOM. For all browser text, we have our own HTML markup parser that understands simple things like italic, bold, new line, and we just render it with our own renderer on Canvas. Caching it is pretty fast.
We have been in the market for one year. The customer usually comes this way: first they get a trial, then they ask a few support questions because our library is pretty new and the documentation is still a bit lacking, and after they go and say, ‘yeah, we will buy.’ The support is very important. We are really trying to do 1-day issue resolution and mostly it works, sometimes it doesn’t. The customer is usually happy if we get issues resolved in one day. That’s about the timeframe the customer is usually willing to wait. The number one support question is usually ‘Tell me what I did wrong.’ Number two is ‘can you do something…’ So far the support hasn’t been very busy. We really don’t have a support person. Usually we distribute support questions between the developers. It has worked fine so far.
Testing is pretty important for SDK because you don’t want a customer to say, ‘hey, this doesn’t work.’ That’s pretty embarrassing. We have our own automated tests that we run on every GIT push. We wrote our own thing. We originally considered using Jenkins, but we have a very big focus on visual stuff, and we figured that it is easier to write our own. We have something like 160 webpages distributed in various chart types, and each webpages has basically a page with some charts. We run it using Phantom, render the image, check the error logs. We compare images, we record the performance, and we record the errors. For the test to succeed, the images need to be the same. We do pixel-by-pixel comparison. There should be no errors in the console. Performance is recorded and we review it before release. Comparing images looks like a very aggressive way. The reason we do this is because this is a visual library, and if you get a customer, he would integrate your chart, add some styling of his own, and he really wouldn’t like that you get an update and suddenly everything looks different. That’s why this is the first thing we did, and we want to stick to this.
For the future, this is what we want to do next in testing: we want to add really interactive testing. For this we have a built-in record and playback system. This way, all the input events will be recorded, and instead of just rendering a webpage, you will render a webpage and then run back input events that were recorded, and check if the events are the same that are going back to the user, and if the final image looks the same. Interactivity is a big part of our product, and we want to automate everything here, or, as much as possible, and to free the developers to do interesting stuff.
We used Phantom for simple testing, but Phantom is just like a browser that’s rendering on a page. We want to test every device, and we don’t have these devices in our office. Currently we are working with BrowserStack—a service that will provide you with lots of devices, and you can just give them a URL, and they will give you either an interactive mode—just like a video screen where you can interact with the device—or you can interact with the device in an automated way with Selenium API. We are currently integrating with them to make automated tests on as many devices as we can. So this is a different approach than buying 50 devices. We’ll see if it works, but currently we have high hopes and we are working with BrowserStack. They have some issues that we have encountered, but they are making good progress.
Our stuff is pretty complicated, and we spent 50% of the time debugging and understanding what’s going on. For that we use Chrome Dev tools. So with the debugger, insert break points, otherwise the local variables runs the program step by step, and that’s the basic tool. You can put break points wherever you want, and if you really have some conditions then you put the debugger in your code and the browser will stop there.
Profiler gives you a quick overview about the CPU load and a nice overview about the hottest functions in your code. You go in and check what’s going on. Profiler has a text view that can show you exactly which function has spent the most time, and you can really go and drill down in your call stack and see where the issues are.
Timeline is nice, too, for seeing your frame rate and what’s going on. Chrome does nice triangles that show warnings that there may be some issues. It’s another nice debugging tool to see where the problems are. Chrome is doing as much as it can to show what’s going on under the hood.
Another nice feature is that you can use all these debuggers on a mobile phone. You just connect your mobile phone and can go on and debug mobile devices. You can do this for Android, you can do this for iOS—with a Mac, not with a PC, that’s a bit tricky. So far we haven’t really had an issue that is not reproducible on Android or iOS, but if you have an issue on Mac, Blackberry or Nokia phone, then I don’t know how to debug that.
For the future, of course we are working on more charts, and we are working on an extension API so users can add functionality to the chart itself. So we have had a few feature requests where people want a very narrow niche feature like a specific interactivity or specific overlay of their data, and we want to do it via API. Currently we are stabilizing the internal architecture and the API should be available in a year or so.
One thing that Chrome Dev tools doesn’t give you is to give a quick overview of how much memory was allocated and compare it between graphs. That’s one more thing we’d like to add to our automated tests, to understand how much memory allocations are going on. Memory allocations are not nice because you need to run garbage collector to free that up. And garbage collector just freezes animations. So you want garbage collector to run as little as possible. We are currently looking into tools that would track these allocations and give us a number.
We are thinking about experimenting with WebGL because it is the future, and we’ll get there when WebGL is supported and it’ll give us maybe not bigger performance gains, but nicer graphics because these charts are looking pretty simple, and if you add more effects, performance just goes down dramatically. You can do a lot more with WebGL in terms of nice visual effects.