You work from local databases. You keep a migration script that sets up the schema and another migration script that sets up the data. If you create a feature, you must add to each script when merging.

You can run unit tests by creating transactions, running the test, and then rolling back at the end.

I do get your point, though. It's more convenient to be able to mock your database from your code.

That's much more complicated than just mocking your context in unit tests....

https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dn314429(v=vs.113)....

Go down to "Testing Query Scenerios". I've wrapped the four "mockset.As" lines into one extension method to make it a lot less verbose.

Yes it is, but it's much less complicated than trying to guess what your generated SQL code will look like.

No need to guess. Run all of your unit tests without mocking out your DbContext and add the following ....

context.Database.Log = log.Info

Where Log.info is just a method that accepts a string and take a look at the log file generated from your unit tests.

Isolation I guess? I don't know what your experience is and why you think it cannot be anything but slow but... it's not?

pgtap lets us unit test our SQL functions, triggers, views, etc. It's integrated with our change management system. It's fast enough and works well.