Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
We deployed a live, fresh, swanky site using preview 3 including rigorous stress testing.
Page Output caching was our saviour and afforded us the ability to meet our performance contractual requirements.
My question is, is there a difference between action OutputCacheFilter and page output caching?
Is the action output caching faster than page output caching?
Internally, the OutputCacheAttribute (aka output cache filter) uses the same internal mechanism as page output caching (aka the @OutputCache directive).
Therefore, it’s not any faster than page output caching. However, with MVC, you really can’t use page output caching via the @OutputCache directive in MVC because we render the view (aka page) after the action runs. So you would gain very little benefit.
With the output cache filter, it does the correct thing and does not execute the action code if the result is in the output cache. Hope that helps. 🙂