Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update libuv references in Kestrel docs #5695

Closed
2 tasks done
scottaddie opened this issue Mar 14, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed
2 tasks done

Update libuv references in Kestrel docs #5695

scottaddie opened this issue Mar 14, 2018 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@scottaddie
Copy link
Member

scottaddie commented Mar 14, 2018

aspnet/Announcements#296

Per the announcement, managed sockets are replacing libuv in Kestrel as of ASP.NET Core 2.1. Update the docs to mention this and that libuv is used in versions prior to that.

Affected docs:

@scottaddie scottaddie added the 2.1 label Mar 14, 2018
@scottaddie scottaddie added this to the 2018 - Quarter 1 milestone Mar 14, 2018
@scottaddie
Copy link
Member Author

@guardrex This seems like something you'd enjoy. You want this one?

@guardrex
Copy link
Collaborator

guardrex commented Apr 29, 2018

Transport Extensibility

The current implementation of the underlying libuv connection semantics has been decoupled from the rest of Kestrel and abstracted away into a new Transport abstraction. While we continue to ship with libuv as the default transport, we are also adding support for a new transport based on the socket types included in .NET.

Socket Transport

We are continuing to invest in a new socket transport for Kestrel as we believe it has the potential to be more performant than the existing libuv transport. While we aren’t quite there yet, you can still easily switch to the new socket transport and try it out today.

public static IWebHost BuildWebHost(string[] args) =>
    WebHost.CreateDefaultBuilder(args)
    .UseSockets()
.UseStartup<Startup>()

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants