Written by Technical Team | Last updated 09.01.2026 | 12 minute read
If you run a customer-facing platform, downtime is rarely “just a few minutes”. It’s failed payments, abandoned checkouts, interrupted integrations, and support tickets that land before your release notes are even published. For teams building in ASP.NET Core, the good news is that zero-downtime deployments are very achievable—provided you treat them as an engineering discipline rather than a box-ticking exercise.
From a .NET development company’s perspective, “zero downtime” is best understood as continuous availability during change. Your service keeps answering requests while you roll out a new version, and any inevitable hiccups are contained to such a small slice of traffic that users don’t notice. Kubernetes gives you the mechanics for this: replica management, health-aware traffic routing, controlled rollouts, and fast rollback. ASP.NET Core gives you the application-level hooks: health checks, graceful shutdown, and predictable hosting behaviour. The magic happens in how you connect the two—especially around readiness, termination, and database change management.
What follows is an in-depth, practical explanation of how we design and deliver zero-downtime deployments for Kubernetes-hosted ASP.NET Core systems, including the parts most teams underestimate until production reminds them.
Zero downtime is not the absence of change-related risk; it’s the deliberate reduction of user-visible impact while change happens. In Kubernetes terms, you are replacing pods behind a stable Service or Ingress without ever dropping below the capacity and correctness your users require.
The first misconception we see is treating “rolling update” as synonymous with “zero downtime”. Rolling updates are a tool, not a guarantee. If your pods report “ready” too early, if they terminate too quickly, if they share a database schema that changes incompatibly, or if a cache warm-up creates thundering herd latency, you can still create errors while every dashboard remains green.
The second misconception is focusing purely on HTTP uptime. Many modern .NET systems are more than an API: background processing, message consumption, scheduled jobs, websockets, long-running requests, and third-party callbacks all complicate deployment safety. A deployment can be “up” while still losing messages, double-processing work, or causing intermittent 502/504 errors at the edge.
A more useful definition is this: a zero-downtime deployment keeps the previous version serving traffic until the new version is demonstrably ready, then transitions traffic in a controlled way, while ensuring in-flight work is not abruptly broken. Kubernetes and ASP.NET Core can deliver that—if you design for it.
In Kubernetes, the basic pattern is straightforward: run multiple replicas of your ASP.NET Core container, then update your Deployment. Kubernetes creates new pods, waits for them to become ready, and only then scales down old pods. But the details inside that sentence are where zero downtime is won or lost.
A .NET service should only receive traffic when it can reliably handle requests end-to-end. That means your readiness signal needs to reflect more than “the process started”. For an ASP.NET Core API, readiness typically depends on critical downstreams: the primary database, essential queues, identity provider reachability, and any configuration that must load successfully. If the app is “alive” but not yet ready, Kubernetes must keep it out of rotation. This is exactly why separating liveness and readiness matters: liveness answers “should this process be restarted?”, readiness answers “should this pod receive traffic right now?”.
Surge capacity is the second lever. Zero downtime usually requires overlap: new pods come up while old pods are still serving. If you deploy with a single replica and no ability to surge, you’re effectively choosing downtime or risk. Even with multiple replicas, if your rolling update allows too many unavailable pods at once, you can dip below your required capacity and turn a deployment into an outage during peak load.
Safe termination is the third lever, and it’s the one that bites .NET teams who assume “Kubernetes will handle it”. When Kubernetes replaces a pod, it sends a termination signal and gives the container a grace period. If your ASP.NET Core process stops accepting new connections, allows in-flight requests to finish, and cleanly drains background tasks, users never notice. If it exits immediately, you get spiky 5xx errors—often only visible at the ingress layer. The goal is to stop receiving new traffic before shutdown begins, then delay process exit long enough for traffic routing to catch up.
Here are the Kubernetes and application practices we combine to make rolling updates behave like true zero-downtime deployments for ASP.NET Core:
When these are aligned, Kubernetes will only route traffic to pods that are genuinely ready, will maintain capacity during rollouts, and will retire old pods without creating a window where requests are still being sent to an instance that is already going away.
One subtle but important point: readiness is not just for deployments. Readiness protects you during node drains, autoscaling events, and transient dependency failures. If your database blips for 20 seconds, a good readiness signal temporarily removes pods from rotation rather than letting them fail requests repeatedly while still being “up”.
Rolling updates are excellent for routine releases, but they are not the only way to achieve zero downtime. When the business risk is higher—major refactors, pricing logic, authentication changes, large dependency upgrades—we frequently recommend traffic-shifting strategies: blue-green or canary. These approaches treat deployment as two phases: get the new version running and decide how traffic moves to it.
Blue-green deployment is conceptually simple: you run two environments (or two sets of pods) side by side. “Blue” serves production traffic; “Green” is the candidate release. Once Green is verified, you switch traffic over, usually instantly. The power of blue-green is rollback certainty: if anything looks wrong, you switch back to Blue without rebuilding images or waiting for pods to roll. In a Kubernetes setting, this is often implemented by running two Deployments (blue and green) and using the Service selector (or Ingress routing) to direct traffic to one at a time.
Canary deployment is about graduated exposure. Instead of switching 100% of traffic, you route a small percentage to the new version, observe metrics and behaviour, then increase the percentage in steps. Canary is ideal when you care about real-world traffic patterns, because synthetic tests rarely mimic production’s messy diversity: weird clients, localisation edge cases, and surprising integration payloads. Kubernetes Ingress controllers and service meshes can split traffic by weight, header, cookie, or other rules, letting you run controlled experiments without changing client behaviour.
Both strategies become far more effective when you treat them as part of a release system, not a manual ritual. The goal isn’t to add bureaucracy; it’s to make safe delivery repeatable. In practice, that means automated checks, observable rollouts, and fast abort paths.
Here are the decision points we use with clients when choosing between rolling, blue-green, and canary:
For ASP.NET Core specifically, traffic shifting shines when you pair it with feature flags and backward-compatible behaviour. A canary should be able to operate safely even if only a slice of your system is updated. That pushes you towards contract-first APIs, tolerant consumers, and database changes that don’t force everything to upgrade at the same time.
There’s also a cultural benefit: canary deployments encourage teams to define what “healthy” means beyond “it responds”. You start measuring error budgets, latency distributions, and business KPIs per version. Over time, you move from “deploy and hope” to “deploy and verify”.
If there is a single area where “zero-downtime deployment” projects fail, it’s not Kubernetes. It’s the database. Most downtime blamed on deployments is actually caused by schema changes, migration locks, incompatible queries, or stateful assumptions that break when two versions run simultaneously.
Kubernetes strategies assume overlap: old and new pods will coexist. That means your database must tolerate two application versions at once. In .NET systems, this is where teams need to be deliberate about Entity Framework migrations, stored procedure changes, and data backfills.
A zero-downtime approach to schema evolution is usually incremental and reversible. Instead of “rename column and update code”, you add new structures, write to both, read in a compatible way, backfill data, and only then remove old structures once all old versions are gone. This sounds slower, but in practice it speeds delivery because it prevents emergency rollbacks and late-night fixes. The trick is to treat migrations as part of deployment design, not an afterthought.
Locking behaviour matters. Some migration operations can hold locks that block production queries, especially on large tables. Even if the application pods are rolling smoothly, a long-running migration can freeze the system and look like downtime. The mitigation is choosing online-safe migration patterns, breaking large changes into smaller steps, and scheduling heavy operations with care. In many environments, we separate “schema change” from “application rollout” so that each step is independently verifiable.
State also includes caches, queues, and sessions. If your ASP.NET Core app relies on in-memory session state or local caches without coordination, a rollout can create user-impact even when HTTP stays up. For Kubernetes-hosted .NET services, the default assumption should be stateless pods with externally managed state: distributed caches, persistent queues, and durable stores. When that isn’t possible, you need explicit strategies for draining, handover, and consistency.
A practical rule we use is: deployments should be safe even if half your pods are on the new version and half are on the old version. If that statement is false for a given release, you need to either (a) redesign the change to be compatible, (b) use a blue-green cutover with strict sequencing, or (c) accept that you’re doing a coordinated maintenance event rather than a zero-downtime deployment.
The payoff is huge. Once your team internalises compatibility-first database changes, your Kubernetes deployment strategy becomes an accelerator rather than a safety net.
Kubernetes and ASP.NET Core can do the mechanics, but operational maturity determines whether “zero downtime” is real or aspirational. In our experience, reliable zero-downtime deployments come from guardrails: pipelines that prevent risky releases from shipping, and telemetry that proves a release is healthy before it becomes fully live.
A good CI/CD pipeline for an ASP.NET Core Kubernetes platform does more than build and push an image. It enforces repeatability, traceability, and promotion. You want the same container image to move through environments, with configuration injected appropriately, and with a clear path back to a known-good version. This is where disciplined versioning and immutable artefacts matter.
Observability is the other half. During a rollout, you should be able to answer, quickly and confidently: Are error rates rising? Is latency shifting? Are only some routes failing? Are retries masking a problem? Is the database under new pressure? This requires metrics, structured logs, and traces that are correlated to the deployed version. For .NET teams, this often means embracing OpenTelemetry conventions and ensuring every service reports its build/version metadata so you can slice behaviour by release.
Guardrails also include cluster-level reliability features. You can have perfect application shutdown handling and still get downtime if a node drain evicts too many pods at once, or if all replicas end up on the same failure domain. Spreading replicas and limiting voluntary disruption are unglamorous, but they are foundational. The difference between “we had a blip” and “nobody noticed” is often the difference between one healthy replica remaining and zero.
This is also where release policies become valuable. Not every deployment needs a canary, but every deployment should have a clear success signal and an abort condition. If you can’t define what “good” looks like, you’ll either ship risk blindly or overreact to noise.
In practice, our most effective operational patterns for zero-downtime ASP.NET Core deployments include:
A final point that’s easy to overlook: zero-downtime deployments are as much about people as platforms. If releases depend on one engineer remembering ten manual steps, you don’t have a deployment strategy—you have a hero narrative. The goal is to encode safety into the pipeline and the platform so every release benefits from the same discipline, regardless of who presses the button.
Is your team looking for help with .NET development? Click the button below.
Get in touch