Well, if you found a productive workflow then who am I to judge, right? However, if I was hired into your team tomorrow you'll have to fiercely fight with me o

Well, if you found a productive workflow then who am I to judge, right? However, if I was hired into your team tomorrow you'll have to fiercely fight with me over this: > And sure, we could probably refactor it to use transactions to shave a few seconds of running our test suite, but it'd add some additional mental complexity to our codebase to do so. Various languages and frameworks demonstrate that abstracting this away and using convenient wrappers is more or less trivial, and definitely a solved problem. And the resulting code is simple; you are (mostly) none the wiser that you are actually using a temporary transaction that would be ultimately rolled back. ...Though that is extremely sensitive to which programming language and DB library you are using, of course. Your approach works, so keep using it but IMO it's a temporary one and it could stop being fit-for-purpose Soon™. You yourself are already aware of its limitations so just keep an eye out for this moment and be decisive when the time comes to migrate away from it. My $0.02.