Home/ Questions/Q 1114413
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-05-17T03:00:09+00:00

Michael Feathers, in Working Effectively With Legacy Code , on pages 13-14 mentions: A

  • 0

Michael Feathers, in Working Effectively With Legacy Code, on pages 13-14 mentions:

A unit test that takes 1/10th of a
second to run is a slow unit test…
If [unit tests] don’t run fast, they
aren’t unit tests.

I can understand why 1/10th a second is too slow if one has 30,000 tests, as it would take close to an hour to run. However, does this mean 1/11th of a second is any better? No, not really (as it’s only 5 minutes faster). So a hard fast rule probably isn’t perfect.

Thus when considering how slow is too slow for a unit tests, perhaps I should rephrase the question. How long is too long for a developer to wait for the unit test suite to complete?

To give an example of test speeds. Take a look at several MSTest unit test duration timings:

0.2637638 seconds
0.0589954
0.0272193
0.0209824
0.0199389
0.0088322
0.0033815
0.0028137
0.0027601
0.0008775
0.0008171
0.0007351
0.0007147
0.0005898
0.0004937
0.0004624
0.00045
0.0004397
0.0004385
0.0004376
0.0003329

The average for all 21 of these unit tests comes to 0.019785 seconds. Note the slowest test is due to it using Microsoft Moles to mock/isolate the file system.

So with this example, if my unit test suite grows to 10,000 tests, it could take over 3 minutes to run.

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    I’ve looked at one such project where the number of unit tests made the system take too long to test everything. “Too long” meaning that you basically didn’t do that as part of your normal development routine.

    However, what they had done was to categorize the unit tests into two parts. Critical tests, and “everything else”.

    Critical tests took just a few seconds to run, and tested only the most critical parts of the system, where “critical” here meant “if something is wrong here, everything is going to be wrong”.

    Tests that made the entire run take too long was relegated to the “everything else” section, and was only run on the build server.

    Whenever someone committed code to the source control repository, the critical tests would again run first, and then a “full run” was scheduled a few minutes into the future. If nobody checked in code during that interval, the full tests was run. Granted, they didn’t take 30 minutes, more like 8-10.

    This was done using TeamCity, so even if one build agent was busy with the full unit test suit, the other build agents could still pick up normal commits and run the critical unit tests as often as needed.

    • 0