We have just released the final version of ASP.NET MVC 3. Read the official MVC 3 release information or download MVC 3.
To help you upgrade your MVC 2 projects to MVC 3 we have released an upgrade tool. You can download it here: http://aspnet.codeplex.com/releases/view/59008. (This is an update of the tool that Eilon Lipton previously previewed on his blog and now we are giving it a more permanent home on our CodePlex site).
April 11 Update: We made a small update to the tool that allows you to skip the backup step. You might want to consider skipping the backup step if you use source control or if your solution is very big.
January 14 Update: We have updated the file on codeplex to fix an issue with converting solutions that had Web Sites or other solution items. If you are having problems please make sure you download the tool again from the codeplex site.
The upgrade tool only supports Visual Studio 2010 projects targeting .NET 4. Upgrading both MVC 2 and MVC 3 Beta (or RC) projects is supported.
The tool does not support Visual Studio 2008 solutions, MVC 1 projects, or projects targeting .NET 3.5. Those projects will first have to be upgraded using Visual Studio 2010 and/or retargeted for .NET 4:
The usage of the tool is quite simple:
During the conversion process the tool will:
This is an unsupported utility and there is a possibility that it might not work correctly for your solution. Specifically, the tool has the following limitations:
However, if you run into problems let me know and I will see if we can get them addressed.
Now that the final version of MVC 3 has been released I think information about the performance characteristics of this latest installment would be very useful for those weighing the pros and cons of updating their MVC 2 applications. In this post I will talk about what you might expect when moving to MVC 3. The short answer is things should be about the same.
Of course that short statement is not accurate because the only correct answer to such performance questions is: “it depends”. It depends on what your application does and which features it is using: database connections, business logic, output caching, html helpers, etc. I say this because in a moment I will present some numbers and they might not correspond to what you would see in your application. But they should provide you with a good starting point.
The more detailed answer is that some applications will perform better while others will perform worse. That is because as we added new features (dependency injection, improved filters, etc.) some components of MVC 3 got slower than in MVC 2 simply because they are now doing more work. At the same time we have introduced targeted performance optimizations which improved other components. The only definite way you can know the impact on your application is if you carefully measure performance yourself. At the end of this post I will provide a rough list of some of the things that have gotten faster or slower.
The application I will use for the tests is the default “Internet Application” project template that ships with every installation of MVC. While quite small, it is still a pretty good choice because it uses a wide variety of MVC features. This means that the test exercises a large part of the framework without focusing on any individual features.
For my tests I have the following applications:
I modified each of these applications in the following ways to ensure consistency and remove unnecessary noise from the results:
For each of the applications I executed the following sequence of requests and recorded the throughput (number of requests per second). The sequence ran for about 1 hour in our performance testing lab (meaning that the results should be amortized with respect to any other OS tasks that might have occurred on the server).
Note: The above results were captured on a 12-core server and should only be used for comparative purposes. Absolute RPS values on your own machine might de vastly different but their relative distribution should remain the same.
As you can see from comparing the results for Application 1 and Application 2 the difference is quite small. In fact –1.82% falls within the margin of error. Application 1 and Application 2 are the same identical application, except 1. references System.Web.Mvc.dll version 2.0 and 2. references System.Web.Mvc.dll version 3.0. These results are why we say that MVC 3 is on par with the performance characteristics of MVC 2.
Of course followers of Scott Guthrie will point out that with the RC2 release he claimed that MVC 3 was faster than MVC 2. While that was true at the time it is not correct any longer for RTM. We had to undo a pretty significant performance fix related to model metadata caching because it caused some functional bugs (after all it does not matter how fast your application is if it does not actually work correctly). However, we will have that improvement available as an add-on in MVC Futures and we will roll it into MVC 4.
The comparison of Application 3 and Application 4 will be of interest to those looking at adopting the new Razor view engine. Application 4 is –4.3% slower than Application 3. This shows that using Razor does have a performance cost. However, that difference is not that big and is outweighed by the elegance and increased readability of the new view engine. Razor is also a new technology and I am sure that as it matures we will be able to optimize it even further.
At the beginning of this post I promised that I would list how the various features or components of MVC changed in their performance characteristics. This list is compiled from our internal performance tests as well as change logs. It is meant to be taken as informational only. Your results may vary and depends on how you actually use each feature and what else you have happening in your application
Things that got faster (in no particular order):
Things that got slower (also in no particular order):
Of course I am not going to tell you by how much things have changed because it depends... you will have to measure yourself.