My installation of Visual studio eats up memory like a starved pig. Depending on what I'm doing, after a while, it's too slow and I have to reload it. Typically, devenv.exe will get to around 700 MB before I have to reload it.
I would expect that it's slowing down because of some excessive page swaps or something.
I read somewhere that Ctrl-Alt-Shift-F12 helps, but it does nothing.
Is there any fixes for this, or at least anything that will allow me to run it for longer till it explodes my ram, ie starts to run slow at 4gb rather than 700mb.
I have Windows 7 x64 with 8GB ram. Using Virgin anti virus stuff.
I have lots of Addons running, I have a suspition that it might be resharper that's causing it to slow.
The number of projects or solutions is irrelevant, as I can run a single winforms project with about 50 lines of code and after a few dozen debugs etc, it'll still be like trying flog a dead horse.
Ta.
Intellisense has been known to cause problems, you may want to try to disable it.
Also I had BIG problems with my Anti virus (Kaspersky), the newer versions use a new 'signature' technique that brought mine to a crawl.
Hope this helps
I am tired of how slow the VS2010 is. I know there are a lot of topics here about tuning the settings and I've read/applied them all with not much luck though. Namely the things I've already done:
removed all the extensions
never had a resharper
tuned the settings to get maximum performance
tried SSD and RAM disks
Nothing helped it is still unacceptably slow. I know what I am saying because with VS2008 I never had such problems.
Now, I am working on a quite big C# solution with about 20 projects in it. Visual Studio works quite fast when just opened, but as time goes it starts lagging and eventually gets so slow that I have to restart it. The resource monitor shows that the amount of memory consumed by it is about 200 MB in the beginning and goes up to ~600 MB and then doesn't go any higher. I have 8 GB of total RAM on a x64 laptop with about 4GB that are always free. I find it weird how little memory the VS uses and from what my common sense tells me the more memory the faster the app should work. So I believe my question is how to make the VS use more of the available memory.
PS
I tried a recipe from Configure Visual Studio to use more ram Didn't work out.
There is no way to make Visual Studio use more memory. The application itself has no preset limitation. It will simply use the amount of memory that is granted it by the operating system (just like other apps).
The reason you see it increase to 600MB and then stop is just a side effect of how the managed GC works. As it performs operations like displaying intellisense, performing edits, etc ... more managed objects will be created. Eventually the GC is triggered and it reclaims all of the free objects and the longer lived ones are promoted. Overall though memory usage will be lowered but not as much as before you started editing. Then you edit some more and this process continues until it reaches the appearance of a steady state. If you deeply analyze it you'll see that it's actually more of a saw tooth graph of memory usage.
As to why your particular instance of Visual Studio is slow though is hard to determine remotely. 20 projects is a larger solution but performance should still be acceptable even with that many. Couple of things to try in order to isolate the problem
Try editing a smaller solution. It's possible there is one project in particular which is giving VS a problem. Breaking the project down into smaller solutions could help isolate it.
Try disabling Aero on your computer. It's possible that WPF is a problem here
So my laptop hard drive reported a bad cluster last week, which is never a good sign.
I'm going to be shopping for a hard disk, and I may as well plump for the upgrade to Windows 7, which means a reinstallation of Visual Studio and everything else.
This particular laptop has space for two hard disks, so I was thinking about an SSD drive in one and a larger fastish (7.2k) drive in the other.
Where should Visual Studio best go in this arrangement? And what about "special" folders like %TEMP%? Does it make sense to use a ReadyBoost USB stick when your pagefile is already on an SSD? Should the database server and files live on the hard drive? Should I get concerned about the SSD wearing out?
Thanks all...
Do you have an Antivirus with on-access scans activated? If yes, deactivate it for the directory the compiler is installed and the source code, maybe also other areas (have a look at the on-access-scan stats during compilation). That was the main slow-down on my laptop.
Also a bit more RAM might help better also.
I had a look at the exorbitant prices of SSD. I would think twice before investing a big amount in money in something that might not help in the end (that's why you asked the question here, right? ;-) )
If you really need speed, I would buy a desktop and setup a raid-0 partition. Laptops are quite slow. Of course only if you can accept the drawback in mobility...
Make sure you have 2GB+ of RAM. The more the better, as Win7 will use any spare RAM as a disk cache which will probably negate most of the advantage of an SSD. (We have a solution that took 6 minutes to load the first time in VS2005, and 20 seconds thereafter, due to the disk cache).
If you have enough RAM, stick your temp & intermediate folders in a RAMdisk.
Then split your remaining files over the two drives (e.g. apps and pagefile on one, source/object files on the other) to spread the I/O load across both drives. If using SSD, try to use it as a read-only device as much as possible.
I would put OS and Apps on the SSD, lots of reading, little writing. And then put data on the other.
Visual Studio intensively uses disk while compiling. Putting temp and project folders on high performance disk can speed up compiling very much.
My opinion is based on tests using ramdisk.
What's up people.
Something's been bothering me for a while now... and I was wondering if any of you might know of a workaround for this.
The C# solution im working on is a huge solution that contains about 20 projects and almost the same amount of unit test projects. Each projects contains hundreds of files. So opening and closing the solution takes a while... but once it's opened, everything is fine.
But, if I leave my computer up for the night (with my solution still opened in VS) and come back the next morning, everything I'll do in VS will be very slow for the next half hour or so.
I know why this happens... it's because Windows seems to remove idle processes from memory (RAM). And when I do something in VS, it takes the data from the pagefile and puts it back in the memory which slows everything single operations I do till the process' memory has been fully restored in RAM.
So my question is, is there a way to tell Windows that VS is a high priority process/application and to leave that process' memory in RAM?
Thanks in advance,
-Oli
I don't think this is possible. OTOH, you could put your computer in suspend-to-disk mode. That would pretty much freeze its state as it is when you leave (that is: VS in RAM) and restore it to the same when you start working. As an additional bonus, you would help to conserve energy and thus might save the earth.
You could alter your VS shortcut according to this article to boost the priority, but I don't know whether it would do what you describe for the process' memory.
Also solely for performance sake you could consider getting an SSD drive to replace your hard drive, if you haven't already. A friend of mine showed me his new laptop with an SSD onboard and it booted into Windows under a minute, and opened VS in less than 5 seconds.
Granted that was opening VS straight from the start menu, opening that huge a project hopefully would at least be significantly faster.
AFAIK, changing the process priority won't solve the problem, as the bottleneck seems to be I/O rather than CPU time. If the problem hurts your productivity, it would be well worth it to just buy a few more Gs of RAM (how much depends on your OS and budget). If you can get about 3-4GB of RAM, you can even eliminate the swap file (or close to eliminate it). This will prevent VS from sinking when idle.
Another option would be to create a tool that will walk VS's heap, forcing it into the main memory. This can be done by writing an add-in or by code injection. Have it run before you get to work, and you'll have VS up and about once you get to it. It will, however, require some work, and you might get more than you actually need in memory (some of VS's memory is in the swap file even when you work as usual, as with every other process).
It is slow to load anything other than a small project. It is slow to quit; it can sometimes take minutes. It can be slow to open new files. The record macro feature used to be useful. It is now so slow to start up it's almost always quicker to do it manually!
More info would be helpful. How big are your solutions? What platform are you on. What 3rd party plugins are you running? What else is running on your pc?
3.2GHz P4 Hyperthreaded, 2GB RAM. Running Outlook, Perforce, IE7, directory browsers. Usually have 1-3 instances of VS running. It's much slower than VC6, say. It seems to take a long time to load projects and close down. I'm interested in if people know reasons why this happens, because of the way VS is written. Is it using .net internally and GC slows it down?
One of the biggest culprits for Visual Studio 2005 slowness is Intellisense. This has been brought up on the MSDN forums again and again and again. What I frequently experience is that Intellisense is working nearly non-stop to "re-index" symbols (or whatever you call it). But developers at Microsoft have not been deaf to the complaints and some outgoing folks there have come up with some workarounds that have helped me and might help you:
Check out this link to get a better understanding of Intellisense:
Intellisense Info
Then check out this link for some macros that I've had a lot of success with:
Intellisense Macros
With those macros, you can turn off intellisense (without renaming any DLLs), restart it, delete the ncb file (which you can do manually, but this is a convenience) and it can give you the status of Intellisense.
it might be that you have a plugin that is misbehaving. Try the safemode switch to see if this improves performance
One of the biggest culprits for Visual Studio 2005 slowness is Intellisense. This has been brought up on the MSDN forums again and again and again. What I frequently experience is that Intellisense is working nearly non-stop to "re-index" symbols [...]
I agree. I use Visual Assist. It is much better. There is no real way to turn "Intellisense" off either. The only way I have found is to rename the DLL so when you restart VS it is not found. This works and makes VS faster.
I tend to agree that VS is a heavyweight. Back in the day I coded in DOS using Boxer text editor and makefiles. Boxer didn't have the heavy intellisense and refactoring features, but it did better in the text editing department, had good syntax highlighting and startup/closing were instantaneous, even on a 486. ...those were the days.
I would say it would be really nice to customize VS to remove all the overhead you're never going to use anyway, but I don't see that happening.
here's ya problem:
3.2GHz P4 Hyperthreaded, 2GB RAM
Hypertheaded means "doesn't actually have two CPU's, but it fakes it". If you have a process with just one thread running, then you get bad performance. It was a good short-term measure, but compared to having two REAL CPU's, it's a slow hack.
I don't think that's the problem at all. The machine is plenty high spec enough to be professional C++ development machine for large projects. I can run Eclipse (which is Java, which is memory hungry and slower than native code) and this is still way faster than VS 2005.
I doubled the amount of RAM from 1GB to 2GB. This helps a lot with linking large applications. We also use Incredibuild to accelerate compilation. But it's the VS app that is slow.
And if you think I'm a grumpy anti-MS zealot, ask yourself why people aren't buying Vista! :)
I'm am seeing mixed results with faster machines. Sure, faster machine, hides the poor performance quality of vs2005 but not all.
Simply taking your obligatory "hello world" C/C++ program, just compile it, (CL /c helloword.cpp),
#include <stdio.h>
#include <windows.h>
int main(char argc, char *argv[])
{
printf("Hello World\n");
return 0;
}
I see 1 seconds compiler under Vc6 and a 6 seconds compile under VS2005.
Using DEPENDS to profile the two, I see 3 areas where the 5 seconds delays and time different are taking place:
~2.5 secs with ADVAPI32.DLL, CryptGetHashParam()
~1.5 secs with OLE2.DLL, StringFromGUID2()
~1.0 secs with C2.DLL, _AbortCompilerPass()
Again, this is just a compile, not a link. The VC8+ compiler executables/dlls are referencing sub-systems like crypto API, the Registry for some transparent reason and it is adding a tremendous amount of overhead to straight and pure compiles.
While a faster machine may hide some of hide slow down, one could only wonder if Microsoft can optimize the compiler by offering options that disables unnecessary overhead references. I understand the better compiler comes with some overhead, but what I see is a 300-500% compile time degradation - thats awful.
Hector Santos, CTO
Santronics Software
This is a purely subjective thing I am afraid.
May it is because of your low end system configuration.
May be VS trying to get updates from the net?
May be you are running too many application in the background.
May be you are trying to open a huge solution.
Recently I've had both Visual Studio 2008 and Visual Studio 2005 on my machine, and I agree that VS2005 is really heavy. They improved upon it in VS2008, although I'm not sure if you'll consider the performance improvements enough.
Could you maybe time some operations and post them so we get an idea what you mean by "slow"? On my machine, I wouldn't call VS 2005 slow, but if you compare it to notepad or my web browser it seems slow. Here's some things that might help people figure out what's going on:
Turn off any features that could affect load time. This includes uninstalling all add-ons and making sure that VS isn't configured to automatically open a project.
Reboot your machine.
Time how long it starts VS 2005 to start, from the time you click the icon until the program starts.
Create a program that you're willing to post here that seems to compile slowly (this might not be possible depending on what it takes to make a slow compile); post the program and how long it takes your computer to build it.
Do you know anyone else with the same kind of machine that has VS 2005 installed? Does it seem slower or faster than yours?
I believe Lord Kelvin said the best thing that can be said about situations like this:
When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge of it is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced it to the stage of science.
Until you give us some measurements to look at, we can't tell you if your machine is genuinely slow or if you are expecting more out of your machine than it can give. Your HT CPU might be the problem; I have roughly equivalent machines at work and at home, but my dual-core work machine runs circles around my single-core home machine when it comes to running VS.
VS 2005 is slower than VS 6 because it is less well optimized for speed. The developers of VS 6 had slower machines than the developers of VS 2005. They made it fast "enough" back then. On a modern machine VS is now "pleasantly fast", where VS 2005 is only just fast enough.
What annoys me is that they decided to scrap VS 6 and start again for VS 2005, when VS 6 was an awesome piece of software that just needed updating.
I noticed above you mentioned you are using perforcet too. Do projects load faster when not in perforce, I am willing to bet that some of the delay you are seeing is related to perforce during load. The latest version of perforce seems a lot slower too.
Change your Solution Platform on "Any CPU" option which is given on the top of Visual Studio then your program build speed will be definitely increased.
here's ya problem:
3.2GHz P4 Hyperthreaded, 2GB RAM
Hypertheaded means "doesn't actually have two CPU's, but it fakes it". If you have a process with just one thread running, then you get bad performance. It was a good short-term measure, but compared to having two REAL CPU's, it's a slow hack.
2GB of RAM would be an issue too, based on what you said you run. If you have a basic 5400RPM disk, then it's going to make it all worse.
I'd recommend, based on what you posted:
A good core2 machine, maybe a quad if you have the budget.
3GB of ram if you are running a 32bit OS, 4+GB if you are running x64. 4GB means you waste 1GB under 32bit.
Get 7200RPM disks, or better. If you can, RAID0 them (stripe) or RAID0+1 (stripe+mirror) if you can get 4 drives (stripe == split content over the two disks, so you can read from both at the same time. stripe+mirror == the safe version of striping, so your code is on TWO disks at all times)
I have a 2.0ghz Core2 (so roughly 3-4x the performance of your P4, if you count 2 CPU's(cores) to be 2x) with 2GB, and the most I can run well is 2 instances of VS.NET 2008. This is normal - nothing wrong with VS.NET, it's just a huge app.
More RAM. More CPU. More Screen. More. More. More :)