Geek asks and answers

Debug builds compile much slower than release

In Visual Studio 2005, we have one library with files with a frequency of 195 bps, which takes about 2 minutes to create, and about 6 minutes to debug.

I always thought that building releases should take longer due to optimization. Why does building debugging take much more time than release? Is there a way to speed up debug builds as fast as release?

We have enough boost / stl code.

+5
source share
2 answers

I'm going to put a comment on starbolin here as the answer: apples and oranges. It was assumed that the I / O limitation limit did not affect my calculation of the Process Monitor at 600 MB, written for debugging and 300 MB for release. That is, recording an additional 300 MB will take several seconds, not 4 minutes. Therefore, I came to the conclusion that, most likely, there are only different things related between the Debug and Release assemblies. Although optimization should take more time than no optimization, these other debugging-only actions should take more time. It would be nice to see the breakdown exactly where the time goes for Debug and Release, but it seems obvious that these are completely different processes, and Debug just takes a lot more time, at least for Visual Studio 2005 and the project that I tested.

0
source

: Debug-builds I/O, Release-builds ( ).

- , . DEBUG *.pdb, *.obj ( ) .. . , "" (, , ) ..

, RELEASE *.obj "" ( RELEASE ). RELEASE , DEBUG, . RELEASE, "--/" .

( , , RELEASE - ---I-O-O- - , RELEASE , , / RELEASE build , DEBUG build.)

3x "RELEASE , DEBUG". , I/O , .. - " " / ? () DEBUG.

, , "RELEASE - 3x , DEBUG". /, I/O.

[UPDATE], , "static-library, no-linking". / ( , ) ( ). , 3x "DEBUG -is-slower-than- RELEASE", , , , ( ), . , RELEASE .

+7

More articles:


All Articles