http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2004/05/05/126934.aspxOver the internal CLR perf alias someone asked about what yields better performance having lots of small assemblies or a few of big ones&#8230; I thought I&#8217;d you&#8217;d find the comments from the team interesting... As Rico would say, nothingen-USTelligent Evolution Platform Developer Build (Build: 5.6.50428.7875)http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2004/05/05/126934.aspx#9790810Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:14:54 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:9790810 Brad Abrams Perf trade off lots of small assemblies or fewer bigger | debt solutions<p>PingBack from <a rel="nofollow" target="_new" href="http://debtsolutionsnow.info/story.php?id=11700">http://debtsolutionsnow.info/story.php?id=11700</a></p> <img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=9790810" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2004/05/05/126934.aspx#8736157Wed, 16 Jul 2008 04:17:58 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:8736157Chad Myers' Blog<p>I&amp;#39;ve been hearing from several colleagues about how their Visual Studio solution files have many</p> <img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=8736157" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2004/05/05/126934.aspx#434929Sat, 02 Jul 2005 18:32:51 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:434929greg::blog<div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=434929" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2004/05/05/126934.aspx#434536Fri, 01 Jul 2005 08:20:33 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:434536greg::blog<div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=434536" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2004/05/05/126934.aspx#434535Fri, 01 Jul 2005 08:20:16 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:434535greg::blog<div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=434535" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2004/05/05/126934.aspx#368813Tue, 08 Feb 2005 04:26:00 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:368813Anatoly Lubarsky: T-SQL Weblog<div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=368813" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2004/05/05/126934.aspx#135690Thu, 20 May 2004 08:19:00 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:135690Naveen KaramchettiI guess 10+ would mean lots of assemblies.<div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=135690" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2004/05/05/126934.aspx#127878Fri, 07 May 2004 15:00:00 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:127878Jeremy MarschWhat constitutes &quot;lots&quot; of assemblies? 5? 10? 100?<div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=127878" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2004/05/05/126934.aspx#127822Fri, 07 May 2004 13:55:00 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:127822Jiho HanPaul, <br> <br>I remeber there being a way to package multiple assemblies into a single assebly at deployment time. As I understood, you couldn't do this from VS.NET IDE but only using the SDK command line tools. That also goes for building your projects to a .netmodule instead of .dlls. VS.NET 2003 - as far as I know - doesn't support this. <br> <br>I wonder whether whidbey addresses this problem...<div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=127822" width="1" height="1">http://blogs.msdn.com/b/brada/archive/2004/05/05/126934.aspx#127701Fri, 07 May 2004 10:04:00 GMT91d46819-8472-40ad-a661-2c78acb4018c:127701Hendrik Swanepoel<div style="clear:both;"></div><img src="http://blogs.msdn.com/aggbug.aspx?PostID=127701" width="1" height="1">