Thanks for the explanation. If not for the "reactive mode", what is the advantage of the adaptive scheduler? What other modes does it support?
>Apart from implementing the same interface the implementations of the adaptive >and default schedulers are separate. Last time I looked they implemented the same interface and the same base class. Of course, their behavior is quite different. I'm still very interested in learning about the future FLIPs mentioned. Based on the replies, I'm assuming that they will support the changes required for https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-30773, or at least provide the basis for implementing them. -Max On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 4:57 PM Chesnay Schepler <ches...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 26/01/2023 16:18, Maximilian Michels wrote: > > I see slightly different goals for the standard and the adaptive > scheduler. The adaptive scheduler's goal is to adapt the Flink job > according to the available resources. > > This is really a misconception that we just have to stomp out. > > This statement only applies to reactive mode, a special mode in which the > adaptive scheduler (AS) can run in where active resource management is not > supported since requesting infinite resources from k8s doesn't really make > sense. > > The AS itself can work perfectly fine with active resource management, and > has no effect on how the RM talks to k8s. It can just keep the job running in > cases where less than desired (==user-provided parallelism) resources are > provided by k8s (possibly temporarily). > > On 26/01/2023 16:18, Maximilian Michels wrote: > > After > all, both schedulers share the same super class > > Apart from implementing the same interface the implementations of the > adaptive and default schedulers are separate.
