Yeah, I didn't mean it's a unit test as it'd already been quite heavyweight.
It's much better than I thought - with the image pulled the test takes about 5s compared to the previous 6-7s. I'll take this approach then, thank you for your advice. > You could argue it's already an integration test. Running an integration > test against an in-memory implementation doesn't make it a unit test (IMO). > I think it's reasonable to run integration tests that execute against > testcontainers in the PreCommit. The bar for PreCommit should be how > expensive/time-consuming the test is compared to how much signal it gives > us, not whether we classify it as a unit test. > > Have you compared the runtime when running the test with testcontainers? >
