2010YOUY01 commented on issue #21998: URL: https://github.com/apache/datafusion/issues/21998#issuecomment-4367752668
Thank you — here is some additional context: There is already an existing fuzzer at https://github.com/apache/datafusion-sqlparser-rs/tree/main/fuzz. I think a single top-level fuzzer would be preferable, unless there are specific crates that make good standalone fuzz targets. I’ve tried general-purpose byte-level fuzzers before, but they don’t seem to work well for SQL. Ideally, test cases that target edge cases should be valid SQL, or at least close to valid queries. However, general-purpose fuzzers struggle to generate such inputs, likely because they cannot infer the underlying SQL structure, which is significantly more complex than the input formats that work well with byte-level fuzzing. Overall, I think it’s great to have basic coverage, but this direction may not be worth investing too deeply in. Though, using those traditional byte-level fuzzers to mutate existing test case slightly would be a good idea to strengthen the test coverage. > 2\. **`primary_contact` / `auto_ccs` for OSS-Fuzz `project.yaml`**: OSS-Fuzz wants Google-account emails on file for crash notifications. Who from the PMC would want to be on that list? I can default to a single contact if a PMC alias isn't preferred. How does that work 🤔? Is it the same as a local fuzz runner, except Google provides compute resources to run it for you? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
