Improve the performance of Visual Studio
Visual Studio seems to be getting slower. Please focus on improving the performance and limiting the enormous load on the HDD
VS still get's the (Not responding) freezes for the most simple tasks.
Surely that has to be more important than fixing icons and project-templates.
Please do something about the responsiveness.
are you doing anything to fix problem regarding very slow designer?!
If I have a long form long 4000+, for example, any changes on page, either in Source mode, or Design mode, VS take ages to apply changes on page.
Outside on WWW are so many posts on this topic for VS2010, and also VS2008, that I was 110% you will fix this problem. But, I must admit I was very disappointed problem still continue in VS11.
I am a college student, I used visual studio 2008 and visual studio 2010. But visual studio 2010's launch speed is so slow, and it's a big different between from visual studio 2008. I hope that visual studio 2010 sp1 can launch faster.
Thank you to all who provided ideas and votes on this topic. We used that data to help prioritize the improvements in Visual Studio 2012 and have been continuing this work with the VS 2013 release.
As Visual Studio 2013 Preview has now shipped, we’d like to close this item to give your votes back to use on specific topics. Our Visual Studio performance team will continue working to improve performance at an ongoing basis. However, we are closing down this general idea, so that you can use your votes on more specific performance topics, and help us focus our team’s investments. When you have performance related suggestions, please create or vote on specific Perf ideas here: http://visualstudio.uservoice.com/forums/121579-visual-studio/category/52115-performance
Please use Visual Studio 2013 Preview (http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=306566) and continue your feedback and votes– we highly value your feedback.
Visual Studio Team
Joseph Edward Barwick commented
Details ? The whole **** thing is getting slower.
I'd be hard pressed to come up with anything in VS2010 thats NOT gotten slower.
The only solution to this problem seems throwing more hardware at it.
Don't get me wrong, I love VS2010. But it's a god **** hog.
Please mark this suggestion as ACCEPTED so that votes can be returned.
@Kevin: As a C++ dev:
> try upgrading to an SSD, ...
I have SSD. Many of my teammates have SSDs as well.
> ... VS activities such as loading the app, compiling code etc are noticeably improved...
SSDs do make VS start faster, but there are no improvements to the responsiveness of the IDE, Intellisense times, build times, etc, whatsoever. SSD or no SSD, working with a large C++ project in VS2010 is slow.
The startup issue with sleeping hdds spinning up afaik is due to Customer Experience Improvement. Turn CEI off in options and it should go away.
David Rathbone commented
Simple VS2010 is a text editor!,
And C,C#,C++,VB.net, ASP.net use a compiler
all thats left to do is have a visual syntax editor for .net or raw language.
Even better would be if Microsft could make its"Window's" Form components have a working form designer!
All the rest is just very slow over kill.
try upgrading to an SSD, (recommend Intel 510, can be used for either a desktop or laptop, and can run in both 3Gb or 6GB if your system supports it) boot times are much faster, overall system response and of course VS activities such as loading the app, compiling code etc are noticeably improved...
@David funny that whenever you try to explain something to Java guys (will it be Java from Sun or Java from Microsoft) they never seem to/want to understand.
As I've said, fiesta driver will never understand what Ferrari driver is talking about when he talks about speed/performance.
As for alexei guy, leave him alone, clearly he has little idea what is he talking about and you would waste more of your time than it's worth it.
C++ Rules and Rocks!
@David you are being rediculous comparing Notepad with VS. I am comparing the very same UI component of VS with VS and the same version of VS. So no, your arguments hold no meaning and therefore no value.
> The fact that the same environment works splendidly for some technologies and horribly for others, pretty much rules out the presentation layer and puts the blame solely on the underlying machinery (aforementioned compiler, reference resolution, and other maps of things to things).
This is like saying that since Notepad can edit the readme.htm file provided with Visual Studio 2010 just fine, it can be used just fine with any text file, even if it is a gigabyte in size. We all know this is not the case, Notepad chokes on large text files.
There are many differences between C++ projects and C# projects, which make C++ projects 'heavier' for the IDE than C# projects: I'd argue that C++ projects are typically significantly larger (many reasons), that parsing headers is generally much more complex and time-consuming than parsing assemblies, that the use of preprocessor makes things even worse for C++, that templates are generally more demanding with respect to coloring, Intellisense, debugging and everything else than generics, etc.
Because of this, a WPF-based IDE (or text editor) might be good enough for an average project in C#, but very bad for an average project in C++.
Compilers aren't written in managed code, neither are the debugger, intellisense or other tools. It seems the problem is precisely with the unmanaged devs pretending they are actually Ferrari owners. It may have been a Ferrari when they bought it, but you've got to know how to drive it. If you left the transmission a few miles back and the wheels exploded before that, it's not really a Ferrari anymore, is it?
Wonder how far we can take this analogy?
Point is, it's the unmanaged side of VS code-base that's broken, leave managed alone and fix what's broken. As David pointed out, resources aren't infinite and are far better spent fixing things and adding features, than doing re-writes.
@Alexei, the fact is that you and all of .NET crowd drive a fiesta, but most of this crowd pretend that they drive ferrari or don't want to see that what they drive is actually just a fiesta.
And still can't/don't want to understand that the managed code is the problem.
OK, with that disparity settled, there is only one more thing I'd just like to point out. The fact that the same environment works splendidly for some technologies and horribly for others, pretty much rules out the presentation layer and puts the blame solely on the underlying machinery (aforementioned compiler, reference resolution, and other maps of things to things). Both managed and unmanaged environments show the same things, it's the machinery that gets the data to show that's different.
So I do stand by my original call to leave WPF alone, it's the gleaming coat of red paint on my Ferrari, I'd rather no one scratched it :)
@Alexei, that explains everything. As I've said in my earlier post, someone who drives ford fiesta will never have any idea what guy who drives ferrari is talking about when he talks about speed/ performance.
Well, Alexei, this explains it all. I should have noted you are talking about managed code. I am talking solely about C++. For a C++ developer, the performance of VS2010 is simply horrible, this is why you see numerous cries to improve it, on this site and elsewhere. For a managed code developer, things might be different. Sorry for the confusion.
@Knowing my first post here clearly says managed :) no need to ask me anything.
Anna Metcalfe commented
@Mr Partridge very true - I suspect we're talking apples and oranges here.
@David and Anna I think that it is important and even I would say vital to ask Alexei one simple question:
Do you develop (on every day basis) in managed or unmanaged code?
I guess we will have to agree to disagree, but:
> The old editors would slow down horribly if you did frequent edits at the bottom of a very large files (many thousands of lines, easy to get with partially generated wrappers). The new one is blazing fast, no matter where in the file I edit.
I don't see this at all. I mean *at all*, that's so far from my experience -- and I do write C++ code in VS day in and day out -- I wonder if we are talking about the same product. Yes, the performance of VS2008 was not always stellar, but VS2008 can *easily* handle the same files and projects VS2010 can't. For my team, on our projects (maybe that's where our environments differ, maybe we have more LOCs or something), in comparison between VS2008 and VS2010, it is VS2008 which is blazing fast no matter where in the file bla bla whatever. And it is VS2010 which is slower to start with and which would slow down considerably even more with each passing hour.
Your other point baffles me as well. What, all those people who were busy redoing the IDE in WPF could do nothing else useful? Surely, whoever was rewriting parts of the IDE could instead apply their efforts towards extending the IDE in other ways, whoever was profiling and tuning the new IDE could instead have been profiling and tuning the old IDE, whoever was finding and fixing bugs in the new code could instead have been finding and fixing bugs in the old IDE, and so on. I am not sure what you are arguing here...
@David The move to WPF may not have had a huge effect on editor as such, but the move to 2010 certainly did. The old editors would slow down horribly if you did frequent edits at the bottom of a very large files (many thousands of lines, easy to get with partially generated wrappers). The new one is blazing fast, no matter where in the file I edit. Eric Lippert alludes to some of the changes in his post here (http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ericlippert/archive/2011/07/19/strings-immutability-and-persistence.aspx) and you could probably push him to do a follow up blog post to compare/contrast with old editor. He likes going into details :)
And we didn't get WPF instead of C++0x or any other features, I highly doubt that the guys doing presentation layer are the same ones who are handling languages an other features like debugger. So I disagree with all of your disagreements :)
@Alexei: My 2 cents:
> I am still certain that WPF is a red herring of performance issues. There was massive rework of back-end for 2010, and the fact that the obviously visible change to the user is WPF, makes people correlated WPF with the cause of slowness. Just because they happened at the same time, doesn't mean the two have any relationship.
It is, of course, true that the move to WPF and .NET involved rewriting a lot of code and thus it is possible that the real reason for the performance degradation is not WPF or .NET per se, but rather issues in the design of the new code. That said, this is not the first time I see a project move from unmanaged code to managed, and I can't help but notice that such moves usually result in performance issues (the reverse is true as well). Granted, WPF is likely not the whole problem, but it definitely seems to me that it is part of the problem.
> But let's say there is a relationship, and we do pay in performance, look at what we've gained. Text rendering quality in WPF got a huge boost from VS adopting it.
Well, WPF got a boost, but what VS got in return? Does the source code look better now? No. Does it render faster, maybe? Heck, no, this is the entire topic of this and other threads, that VS2010 is *much slower* than previous versions. The truth is, there were plenty of issues with the new WPF-based text editor in the beta. The text was blurry, the performance was bad, etc. Well, the team fixed one of these issues, the text is no longer blurry. But, what, are we supposed to celebrate because of this? Even though most of the remaining issues have not been fixed??! I seriously don't get this.
> The adoption of MS tech by major MS product is nothing but a good thing, they (and us) just need to keep pushing for improvements.
I disagree. Instead of moving to WPF, the development team might have added some more C++0x features, might have worked on the performance of parallel builds, might have added more C++-centric features to the IDE, etc. Heck, they might have fixed some of the bugs reported on Connect, many of them have been lying there for years and the standard reply is "we don't have infinite resources, this is a bug, but it doesn't meet our bug bar, so we aren't fixing it". The adoption of MS tech (WPF) by major MS product (VS2010) is thus NOT nothing but a good thing, this adoption has deprived us of many useful features and bug fixes.
> Another re-write (as a lot of people demand) so soon will just cause more issue (more fresh bugs). They will be somewhere else, but we as uses will be no better off. The motivations should be to fix the things that are broken, not re-write the same thing over and over (introducing v1 bugs again and again). Old editor and the rest of the UI, was ancient, it couldn't go on, a re-write was needed. Re-writing it again is Sisyphus' labour.
I disagree again. Nobody is arguing for multiple rewrites. What I want to see is a single rewrite in unmanaged code, and no rewrites after that. Yes, rewrites are bad, but bad rewrites such as this one are doubly so. Do you want VS to remain managed forever? I sure don't. I don't buy this ".NET is fine, it's other things that slow everything down" line. I heard it too many times and I am yet to see a .NET application that would deal with non-trivial amounts of data with the same speed as a C++ application. Unmanaged code has more legs than managed code. Let's move back to unmanaged code and be done with it, at least for C++ development.