arXiv preprint ·
Uncovering Systematic Blind Spots in Graph Database Testing through Integration and Process-Level Analysis
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Topics
Abstract
Graph databases are becoming foundational infrastructure for connected data, and a growing body of automated testing techniques has uncovered many bugs across mature graph database systems. Each technique checks a different aspect of correctness and exposes a different class of defect. Combining them is the natural next step, but each technique is judged by the real bugs it finds, not by useless reports or tests that can never fail, and that is what decides whether a developer can afford to fix the problems. To identify the remaining gaps, we integrated test capabilities from 8 testing methods and conducted an empirical study of their behavior, during which we found two blind spots. First, 12 hours of testing produce thousands of bug reports, far more than the number of genuine defects a mature database is likely to contain. Most reports are false positives caused by dialect or pattern-matching differences, and many of the remaining reports are duplicates. Second, analysis of process-level data reveals that many equivalence-based metamorphic test cases lose their ability to detect defects because of the optimization mechanism. Based on these findings, we summarize and realize these guidelines in GraphWeave, an integrated testing platform for graph databases. This includes a multi-agent system that analyzes the flood of bug reports to produce gating rules for issue filtering and adapter rules for dialect adaptation, and a plan-aware triage routes metamorphic pairs by plan, skipping those that share a plan on the same graph state and therefore cannot detect defects. We apply GraphWeave to NeuG, a recently open-sourced industrial graph database that has not been covered by prior graph database testing work. With modest manual effort, GraphWeave uncovers 19 previously unknown bugs, all of which have since been confirmed.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Software Engineering
How Should Agents See Code? Rethinking Code Representations for Agentic Software Engineering
Code, Commits, and Complexity in the GenAI Era: A Longitudinal Study of Team-Based Capstone Projects
Take It From Here: Evaluating Coding Agents On Project Takeover
Rule-Guided and Trajectory-Aware Repair for LLM-Based HLS Generation
Req2Rust: A Requirements-Guided Agent Harness for Project-Level C++-to-Rust Migration
Get the few papers worth your time in Software Engineering every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.