3 ms·
Having used it in production for a more than a month now... No. No it's not. Mono and .Net Core RC1 were more stable for the same workloads.
by slowmovintarget 10y ago
Having used it in production for a more than a month now... No. No it's not. Mono and .Net Core RC1 were more stable for the same workloads.
- WorldMaker 10y agoAnecdotally, I've not seen any issues, but then I've also been hosting on IIS. Obviously, YMMV. ETA: Also, my comment above was meant to be from the perspective of that it is a technically finished product with an active support lifespan. I did not mean to imply that it was better (or worse) than any alternatives, but that under the accepted definition of "production ready" where a thing is finished and supported, it is suitable to that.
- cryptarch 10y agoMaybe "finished and supported" is the definition of production ready in Microsoft-land, but I'd say "stable, well-tested and batteries-included" is a lot more important. .NET Core has none of that going.
- WorldMaker 10y agoAgain, this seems like an anecdotal divide more than anything. .NET Core has certainly seemed "stable, well-tested, and batteries-included" for any of the projects where I have used it.