Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Investigate why medusa saves more corpus items than echidna #553

Open
anishnaik opened this issue Feb 3, 2025 · 0 comments
Open

Investigate why medusa saves more corpus items than echidna #553

anishnaik opened this issue Feb 3, 2025 · 0 comments
Labels
high-priority not-an-issue planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet.

Comments

@anishnaik
Copy link
Collaborator

According to internal benchmarking results, medusa saves many more corpus items than echidna does even though coverage between the two fuzzers is competitive/comparable. This would imply that we may be doing something wrong. Reducing corpus entries while maintaining coverage will reduce disk writes/reads and improve speed when re-reading the corpus.
@anishnaik anishnaik added high-priority not-an-issue planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet. labels Feb 3, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
high-priority not-an-issue planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@anishnaik