Hi David, Thanks for the feedback, I addressed them in the FLIP.
Please have a look once again and let me know what you think. Best regards, Dennis On Thu, Apr 23, 2026 at 11:17 AM David Radley <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi there, > It would be useful in the motivation to explicitly describe the value of > the different options and the use cases that would drive the need for each > of these permutations and all best practises. Can the autoscaler work out > automatically which of these to use? > Kind regards, David. > > From: Dennis-Mircea Ciupitu <[email protected]> > Date: Wednesday, 15 April 2026 at 08:14 > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [DISCUSS] FLIP-XXX: Composable Parallelism Alignment > Modes for Flink Autoscaler > > Hi all, > > [Sorry for reposting. I noticed the title in the previous message wasn’t > correct, so I’m sharing the updated version here.] > > I’d like to start a discussion on FLIP-XXX: Composable Parallelism > Alignment Modes for Flink Autoscaler [1]. > > I’ve also opened a draft PR with a reference implementation to make the > proposal concrete and easier to review [2]. > > Feedback and suggestions are very welcome. > > Best regards, > Dennis > > [1] > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IbvKspt5jjjqiXl_CeHgI8EBn8LP-Pw0t7LqF85yFRw/edit?usp=sharing > [2] https://github.com/apache/flink-kubernetes-operator/pull/1088 > > Unless otherwise stated above: > > IBM United Kingdom Limited > Registered in England and Wales with number 741598 > Registered office: Building C, IBM Hursley Office, Hursley Park Road, > Winchester, Hampshire SO21 2JN >
