# Towards faster builds

DevFeed: [Towards faster builds](<https://devfeed.tech/articles/towards-faster-builds-43592.md>)

Original publisher: [Read original article](<https://quarkus.io/blog/building-large-applications/>)

Author: Guillaume Smet (https://twitter.com/gsmet\_)

Published: 2026-01-13T00:00:00Z

Content type: article

Language: en

Sources: [Quarkus - Supersonic Subatomic Java](<https://devfeed.tech/sources/quarkus-supersonic-subatomic-java.md>)

Topics: [Quarkus](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/quarkus.md>), [build performance](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/build-performance.md>), [Spring Boot](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/spring-boot.md>), [Code](<https://devfeed.tech/topics/code.md>)

Tags: [build-times](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/build-times.md>), [builds](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/builds.md>), [crud](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/crud.md>), [quarkus](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/quarkus.md>), [rest](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/rest.md>), [spring-boot](<https://devfeed.tech/tags/spring-boot.md>)

## AI overview

A Quarkus post explains improvements to build times for large applications and monoliths. It discusses a comparison with Spring Boot, including applications with REST services and CRUD endpoints, and describes how reproducible feedback helped identify areas for improvement.

## Source excerpt

When we initially released Quarkus, the industry was very much focused on microservices, and that was our primary target. However, Quarkus is also perfectly suited for large monoliths, whether you are migrating existing applications to a more modern runtime or building new ones from scratch. Quarkus has always been able to handle large applications, but we have recently made significant improvements in this area, particularly when it comes to build times. In this post, we will walk through some of these improvements. How the story started Once upon a time, I came across an article comparing Spring Boot and Quarkus for building large monoliths (it's in French, apologies to non-French speakers, but the results are largely self-explanatory). The article compared a Spring Boot application and a Quarkus application implementing the same functionality and even included a generator to create both applications. The generated applications are simple: a few entities, some REST services, and typical CRUD endpoints. What made it really interesting was that you could easily scale up the number of entities and services to see how both frameworks handled larger applications. I truly value this kind of feedback: it not only helps us identify areas for improvement, but also provides a reproducible way to explore them. As expected, Quarkus excelled in memory consumption and startup time. But the build time was noticeably higher than Spring Boot's. Again, this wasn't a surprise. After all, Quarkus shifts more work to build time. But the difference was still significant enough to warrant a closer look. Long story short: we investigated and we improved. A lot. Thanks First, I would like to thank the author of the original article, SpaceFox, for writing it and for providing such a useful generator. As is often the case in the Quarkus world, I was not alone on this journey. I would therefore like to thank everyone who contributed through code, discussions, reviews, insights, and feedback.