One of the simplest engineering habits that dramatically improves team productivity is to
Keep the pull requests small.
It sounds obvious. Yet in many teams, pull (merge) requests regularly contain hundreds or even thousands of changed lines.
Large PRs slow down reviews, introduce more bugs, and create unnecessary friction in the development process.
Small pull requests solve most of these problems.
Let's look at why.
The Problem With Large Pull Requests
A typical large PR looks like this:
Changes:
- 2k lines modified
- 25 files changed
- feature implementation
- refactoring
- small bug fixes
When reviewers open such a PR, several things happen immediately:
it takes a long time to understand the context (even if there's a comprehensive description)
the reviewer gets tired halfway through
parts of the change are reviewed superficially
bugs slip through
Even worse, large PRs often mix multiple types of changes:
feature implementation
refactoring
formatting
dependency updates
This makes the review provess significantly harder.
What a Good Pull Request Looks Like
For example:
Changes:
- 120 lines modified
- 3 files changed
- one clearly defined change
The intention should be obvious from the title:
Add retry mechanism for payment API client
Or
Fix race condition in inventory cache refresh
A reviewer should be able to quickly answer:
What problem does this solve?
What changed in the code?
Could this introduce side effects?
If the answer to these questions is clear, the PR is well srtructured.
Why Small PRs Are Better
Small pull requests bring several benefits.
Faster Reviews
Small PRs are easier to revierw, which means they get merged faster! (Time to market!)
A useful rule of thumb:
A pull request should not take more than 10-15 minutes to review.
If it does, it's probably too large ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Better Code Quality
When changes are small:
reviewers pay more attention
discussions are more focused
issues are caught earlier
Large PRs often lead to "rubber-stamp approvals" ("LGTM").
Easier Debugging
When a bug appears after deployment, smaller PRs make it mych easier to locate the cause.
Instead of searching through a massive change set, you can quickly narrow it down.
Lower Risk Deployments
Small changes mean smaller risk.
If something goes wrong:
This is one the reasons high-performing teams deploy frequently.
Practical Tips for Keeping PRs Small
Here are a few simple habits that help.
Separate Refactoring From Features
Do not mix refactoring and features developmnet in the same PR.
Bad:
Changes:
- Add new API endpoint
- Refactor service layer
Better:
PR #1
Changes:
- Refactor service layer
PR #2
Changes:
- Add new API endpoint
Commit Early and Often
Instead of building a huge branch over several days, open PRs earlier.
Even partial work can be reviewed it it's structured well.
Read more on Release Early, Release Often in my previous article.
Split Large Changes
If a change becomes too big, split it into logical steps.
Example:
PR #1
Changes:
- Introduce new repository interface
PR #2
Changes:
- Implement PGSQL adapter
PR #3
Changes:
- Update service to use new repository
Each step is easier to understand and review. It's atomic. The discussions are stritly focused on a subject.
A Simple Rule I Follow
If a pull request feels difficult to review, it's probably too big.
In practice, I try to keep PRs:
up to 500 lines (under 200-300 lines is a sweet spot; the <100 is a perfect PR)
focused on one logical change
reviewable in under 15 minutes
clearly described
This keeps the development flow smooth and predictable.
Article Takeaway
Small pull requests are one of the easiest improvements a team can make.
They lead to:
faster reviews
better feedback
fewer bugs
smoother deployments
And the best part is that this habit requires no new tools or processes.
Just small changes.
Sources:
Cheers!
