Make VS scalable by switching to 64 bit
No matter how fast and efficient VS will be, we will eventually reach some limit.
I've reached the memory limit since VS 2003 -- around 1.3gb memory usage VS started to give out of memory exceptions. That was using 20-30 projects.
Nowadays we have more than 70 projects in the solution and VS 2010 doesn't reach the x86 memory limit (on a 64 bit windows). Eventually we'll reach the number of projects that will be the tipping point for VS.
Using a 64 bit build of VS will enable us to just buy memory and still work with that solution. 16gb machines are not that expensive today.
I'm occasionally bumping into the 3GB limit with Visual Studio which tends to require me to forcefully close it and relaunch. It not just lines of code, contrary to some opinions I've seen elsewhere on this topic. Add in 3rd party designers and tools, code maps, Intellisense and similar 3rd party plugins trying to track names of classes and methods and so on across a sizable code base, it adds up. If MS wants VS to be a comprehensive IDE, it needs to get beyond the 32bit address space. If you only look at code, fine, but if you use many of the features that make VS what it is, you can run into the 3GB wall. I was very disappointed that this wasn't fixed in VS2013.
Rodion Pronin commented
VS needs x64!
James D. Schwarzmeier commented
Another benefit would be the WPF/XAML designer working on apps that need to target x64.
Erdogan Kurtur commented
VS Group probably *still* think that VS needs to go diet. They've done admirable job if we look back 10+ years (I do still remember VS 2002). But even if they somehow manage to make VS to require only one MB of memory, we still need a 64 bit compiled VS since VS is not just VS executable but a lots of extensions that consume memory. Some extensions are like mandatory if you want a decent environment, like MindScape WebWorkbench, Jetbrains ReSharper, SCC extensions, etc.
R# has this memory problem for too long, they made a move by moving some of the processing outside of the VS using satellite executable files. This model is what Google Chrome is using today.
I've read many blog posts of VS development team, and I truly understand the size of the 64 bit VS conversion. This multi-process model may help you to reduce memory complaints you have to hear everyday.
VS may be the last program on Earth to get a 64 bit version. I think Notepad is probably 64 bit by now. Seriously, what is the holdup in doing this?
ReSharper completely blows up VS because it uses so much memory AND it shares the 32 bit VS process. If VS was 64 bit, this would be a non-issue.
Erdogan Kurtur commented
@DaviBerg: Visual Studio 2012 has already 3GAWARE flag set, so its current limit is ~3 GB. but it is still not enough for long development sessions.
David Berg [msft] commented
Just wanted to point out that if you run Visual Studio under a 64 bit Operating System that you will have 4GB of Virtual Address space available instead of the 2GB you have under a 32 bit Operating System.
If you're stuck on a 32 bit OS you can increase the available Virtual Address space up to 3GB using the BCDEDIT /set IncreaseUserVA option (http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/ff542202(v=vs.85).aspx).
yes, we need VS x64
Also a 64 bit build could gain some performance benefits as well I would think...
Victor Zakharov commented
VS needs to support x64 build/debugging. With same functionality as in x32, including edit and continue.
Huseyin Yilmaz commented
We can't compile our project with VS 2012, because the linker runs out of memory on code generation phase using WPO. (Was no problem on 2010). Development machines have 16 GB RAM installed, and 12 of those sit idle because the compiler and linker are still 32 bit.
Dave Novak commented
I agree that there definitely needs to be BOTH 32-bit and 64-bit versions. We have been building all of our software in both flavors now for years, so why can't Visual Studio do the same?
Luna Lovelace commented
Bad idea. Releasing both 32 bit and 64 bit is an option but 64 only is not a good idea. There are many Pentium 4 systems still in use in the world running Visual Studio and Windows 7 especially in the enterprise world.
People tend to underestimate Pentium 4's they are still very capable for today's computing needs.
Dave Novak commented
Doesn't everyone buy 64-bit machines nowadays? Everyone in our office has one and all of my "modern" machines at home are 64-bit as well. Why not a 64-bit dev environment?
Egor Sinkevich commented
At the moment all developers in our company works on blades with x64 and more than 8GB memory, usually it's 12 GB and some of us has 16 GB. unfortunately because VS is still x32 process it cannot utilize whole memory we have (((. So, X64 really really needed.
Hannes Kochniß commented
We too would like to have as many projects as possible in one solution, right now we work with ~ 20 Solutions because of that (and some other) issues.