4 ms·
One improvement that doesn't get enough attention, IMHO, is that Asp.net core is now performant as hell. https://www.techempower.com/blog/2016/11/16/framework-
by mr_overalls 8y ago
One improvement that doesn't get enough attention, IMHO, is that Asp.net core is now performant as hell.
https://www.techempower.com/blog/2016/11/16/framework-benchmarks-round-13/ https://www.techempower.com/blog/2016/11/16/framework-benchm...
- ksec 8y agoWell it has always been performant. The whole Stackexchange is built with ASP.net, and it render things 10x faster than Ruby Rails while requiring 10x less hardware resources. [1]https://nickcraver.com/blog/2016/02/17/stack-overflow-the-architecture-2016-edition/ https://nickcraver.com/blog/2016/02/17/stack-overflow-the-ar...
- mr_overalls 8y agoFrom the Techempower blog post I linked to above: "The degree of improvement is absolutely astonishing, going from 2,120 requests per second on Mono in Round 11 to 1,822,366 requests per second on ASP.NET Core in Round 13. That’s an approximately 85,900% improvement, and that doesn’t even account for Round 11’s hardware being faster than our new hardware. That is not a typo, it's 859 times faster! We believe this to be the most significant performance improvement that this project has ever seen."
- svick 8y agoIn the past, TechEmpower benchmarks only ran on Linux, so their benchmarks for .Net actually used the Mono project's implementation of ASP.NET, which was slow. That's why the increase was so significant. If they were comparing ASP.NET Core with .Net Framework on Windows, the difference would have almost certainly been much smaller.
- mr_overalls 8y agoI see - good point.
- nicoburns 8y agoI saw claims of a 30% perf increase moving to .net core for a major software company. Can't remember which one, but that's still pretty impressive...
- SBArbeit 8y agoPerhaps you're thinking of Microsoft moving Bing to ASP.NET Core 2.1, with a 34% performance improvement: https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dotnet/2018/08/20/bing-com-runs-on-net-core-2-1/ https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/dotnet/2018/08/20/bing-com-...
- makomk 8y agoMono has always had terrible performance. It was mostly useful as a way to sell developers who wouldn't normally go for a Windows-only solution on something that was effectively Windows-only in practice, if you cared about things like performance.
- myoon 8y agoI think many were more concerned about .NET performance against tech in the same class, mainly the JVM, which previously blew .NET out of the water in the benchmarks for a number of years.
- manigandham 8y agoAs well as the underlying .NET Core framework, and .NET in general. We have great new memory types like Span<T> and Memory<T> and tiered compilation, along with thousands of other improvements that has made major improvements in performance.
- pjmlp 8y agoWhich aren't being fully backported to .NET Framework, whereas many libraries still don't run on Core.
- manigandham 8y agoSo? We're talking about .NET Core here. These new APIs are compatible with netstandard, so they can still be used with Framework but wont be as fast. What libraries are using these newer APIs but refusing to target Core?
- pjmlp 8y agoODP.NET for example. Managed ODP.NET for Core is a partial implementation of the ODP.NET for the full .NET Framework. Libraries using EF 6, because EF Core is still playing catchup with EF 6, and even .NET Core 3.0 won't support 100% of the EF 6 tooling. Libraries using WCF, which lack budget for anyone to rewrite them and the respective clients into other transport protocols. Plenty of other examples.