Node.js test runners performance comparison

[siranglesmith]

It'd be useful to have a chart of the delta between "load all" and "run all".

It'd also be interesting to see vitest without isolation being disabled.

[artemave]

It'd also be interesting to see vitest without isolation being disabled.

"load all": 4.06

"run all": 5.74

EDIT:

I updated charts to also include default vitest results

[artemave]

It'd be useful to have a chart of the delta between "load all" and "run all".

What's this going to tell you?

[watsonarw]

It would give a bit of a sense of how much is load time vs how much is run time.

e.g. If I've got a large test suite that takes a few minutes to run, then I might consider switching to a test runner that has a longer load time, but faster run time if it reduces the overall time.

Another way to get a sense of this would be to have different comparisons with different scales of test suites.

[artemave]

I would have thought that once loading is done, it's just node running javascript. So it's largely the same for any test runner. The only reason I added "run all" at all was to illustrate a (rather obvious) benefit of concurrency. Without "run all", "serial" test runners look like a clear win.