Fusion — a small library created as an attempt to challenge the existing architecture of high-load and real-time apps — is going to be 4 months old soon. Here is what happened over these months:

  • We’ve got 300+ stars on GitHub
  • Total # of downloads of “Stl.Fusion” NuGet package approaches 14K.
  • Fusion Samples — initially a single Blazor WASM app project — got hybrid mode (WASM + Server-Side Blazor), authentication, and session tracking. …

If you believe Virtual DOM is a “lightweight copy” of a real DOM helping to speed up the updates by batching them together— continue reading. Albeit being correct, it’s a highly misleading answer. Surprisingly, it’s also the most popular one: googling for “react virtual DOM” leads you to very similar descriptions: 1, 2, and you get ~ the same results even if you stick to the top answers on StackOverflow: 1, 2, 3;

The content below equally applicable to React and Blazor.

Why it’s a misleading answer?

#1. It doesn’t highlight the key problem Virtual DOM solves — namely, the elimination of unnecessary re-renders. And…

This is Fusion too. But not a real one.

This is a short overview of features added to Fusion over the last 3 months. Some of them are already covered in the Tutorial; I’ll definitely describe the rest soon.

  1. CommandR (which challenges MediatR 😎) and Operations Framework — two parts that make multi-host state sync possible. Yes, now you can scale Fusion services to multiple hosts, and it’s nearly as easy as for any other service. Check out how it works on this animation. For the note, both components actually aren’t tied to Fusion, so you can use them for purposes other than distributed invalidation.
  2. Board Games — the…

The same day .NET 5 was released I shared a single screenshot showing how much faster .NET 5 is relatively to .NET Core 3.1. I promised to share more data later — and here it is.

1. Fusion’s Caching Test — running on Ubuntu + Intel and AMD CPUs

Code: https://github.com/servicetitan/Stl.Fusion.Samples , see “Caching Sample” section there.

Overall, these tests stress an API endpoint fetching a small object from SQL database, the only difference is how it is exposed (locally or via HTTP) and if Fusion is used there to provide transparent caching.

My initial test was performed on Window & AMD CPU, but almost every production service runs on Linux nowadays, so…

I migrated Fusion to .NET 5 today — and honestly, I was absolutely astonished by the performance boost it brings:

The output is produced by Fusion’s “Caching” sample, which uses EF Core 5 and ASP.NET Core. The speed on tests producing 20M+ operations/s (#1, #3) is mainly constrained by Fusion’s logic and Castle.DynamicProxy. And tests producing around 100K operations/s are constrained by either EF & SQL Server (#2, #5) or ASP.NET Core (#4 — it’s ~ the same as #5, but relying on Fusion’s caching features). All of this means that:

  • You may expect +20% speed boost in “normal” apps

Even though Amazon’s example isn’t unique in the context of this post, I’ll use it as a first example of efficiency of a modern web service:

Disclaimer: I am the author of Stl.Fusion — an open-source library helping to address the long-standing problem described in this post. But the problem is real, and the post is relevant even if this library won’t exist.

What’s the biggest difference between the modern and the future web apps?

To answer this question, let’s ask the opposite one first: what’s the most rudimentary UX feature used by almost any web app today?

I nominate this button:

“Refresh” button in Edge

The picture there must be

A very short description first:

  • Imagine you could create a Knockout model that includes every piece of data you have — not on a single client, but on every one of your servers and clients! And once something changes there, any client (or server) that has a replica of this piece gets notified about the change.
  • This is what Fusion offers. And surprisingly, it’s not a toy concept — it’s designed to scale nicely.

Now, let’s talk about specific differences. I assume you already know Fusion abstractions support thread-safety, immutability, async support, etc. — in other words, the “must-have” features…

Every post needs a picture :)

Even though both libraries are targeting similar problems (they help to write real-time apps faster), they do this quite differently:

  • SignalR offers an API helping to deliver server-side notifications to the clients (and vice versa). It’s ~ a layer above WebSockets,that helps your server-side code to track clients, group them, and send messages to either individual clients, a group of them, or all the clients connected to hub (~ SignalR server). Besides that, SignalR has clients written in several languages, and I guess they implement connection resilience and some of other must-have features any production app needs.
  • And Fusion, even…

Yesterday I announced Fusion — a library helping to implement real-time UIs much faster, but more importantly, differently from how it’s done today. And Fusion’s documentation — with pages like Overview and Tutorial — is definitely useful for someone who has already decided to learn it, but a really simple explanation of what Fusion does is missing there. So here it is.

As a bonus, you’ll learn a lot about CAD systems and modern-day manufacturing.

What’s common between Fusion and Incremental Builds?

If you’re a developer knowing about incremental builds, this is the only section you need to read.

Fusion is like an incremental build system, but

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store