|
|
|
|
KNOWLEDGE, REFINED • Builders 🔧 • September 25, 2026
|
|
|
📊 Scanned 7,403 articles • Selected top 11 role-critical insights for today.
|
|
|
🤔 CONTRARIAN TAKEAWAY
The other side of ai market outlook
532 articles say ai boom, but 164 argue ai bubble.
|
|
🚀 AI & Innovation
|
|
🚀 AI & Innovation
via AWS News Blog • 1 min read
|
Learn how Amazon CloudWatch Omni delivers AI-powered observability purpose-built for generative AI and agentic workloads. Trace, evaluate, and experiment with AI agents across any framework—directly from your IDE or a standalone web experience—using open standards and built-in evaluators for quality, correctness, and coherence.
|
💡 WHY THIS MATTERS FOR YOUR ROLE
AI-powered observability is essential for managing the complexity and performance of generative AI and agentic applications.
|
|
|
☁️ Enterprise Tech
|
|
☁️ Enterprise Tech
via AWS News Blog • 1 min read
|
DynamoDB now supports native vector search with single-digit millisecond latency at 99%+ recall. It is designed for any scale, even trillions of vectors and requires zero infrastructure management.
|
💡 WHY THIS MATTERS FOR YOUR ROLE
Native vector search in DynamoDB offers a scalable, zero-infrastructure solution for AI applications, influencing database selection and architecture.
|
|
|
|
☁️ Enterprise Tech
via AWS News Blog • 1 min read
|
Amazon EC2 R9g and R9gd instances powered by AWS Graviton5 are now generally available, delivering up to 25% better compute performance than R8g, ideal for databases, in-memory caches, and real-time analytics.
|
💡 WHY THIS MATTERS FOR YOUR ROLE
Evaluating new AWS Graviton instances is crucial for optimizing database and cache performance, directly impacting scalability and operational costs.
|
|
|
|
☁️ Enterprise Tech
via The GitHub Blog • 1 min read
|
A rewrite this size wasn't affordable before agents. Here's what porting the Copilot agent runtime to 800,000 lines of production Rust actually took. The post Migrating the GitHub Copilot runtime to Rust, using Copilot appeared first on The GitHub Blog.
|
💡 WHY THIS MATTERS FOR YOUR ROLE
This deep dive into migrating a core system to Rust using AI tools offers valuable insights into modern development practices and infrastructure choices.
|
|
|
|
☁️ Enterprise Tech
via Vercel News • 1 min read
|
Vercel has a new low-level untrusted and ephemeral compute platform—designed to give us the control needed to securely and efficiently manage and run builds. Since November 2023, this compute platform, internally codenamed "Hive", has powered Vercel’s builds, enabling key improvements like enhanced build machines and a 30% improvement in build performance.The platform operates on the fundamental assumption that we’re executing potentially malicious code on multi-tenant machines, requiring it to be safe, reliable, performant, and cost-effective. It’s architected to handle multiple use cases and can be composed in different ways depending on what’s needed. Most recently, Hive allowed us to reduce provisioning times for Secure Compute customers from 90 seconds to 5 seconds, while also improving their build speeds.We built Hive because we needed finer control and more granular management to continuously improve Vercel’s infrastructure, to meet the growing demands of our customers and to fulfill our vision of delivering the best development experience in the world. Read more
|
💡 WHY THIS MATTERS FOR YOUR ROLE
Understanding Vercel's build infrastructure provides valuable lessons in secure, scalable, and efficient CI/CD pipeline design.
|
|
|
|
☁️ Enterprise Tech
via Vercel News • 5 min read
|
To a user, an app with a Next.js frontend and a FastAPI backend feels like one product, and the same should be true for the engineers who build it. Instead, the two pieces are often deployed across different clouds with different development and deployment workflows.Today we're introducing Vercel Services in public beta, which lets you run multiple frameworks in one Vercel Project. This unlocks:Atomic deployments: Your frontend, backend, and other services stay in sync and deploy or roll back togetherShared preview deployments: See how any change affects all your servicesInternal service communication: Services can talk to each other without routing through the public InternetVercel handles the rest: routing, builds, deployments, and auto-scaling in production. The developer experience you already know from Vercel now covers your entire application.Compose applications with Vercel ServicesDeclare your services under the services key in vercel.json keeping the routing configuration explicit:Services can be mounted to a shared routing table without the need for a reverse proxy or CORS.The services configuration is recognized at multiple levels of the Vercel platform:The Deployments panel shows a visualization of services graphThe Logs UI allows filtering by individual serviceThe vercel dev CLI automatically runs all services giving you a production-like environment locallyService bindingsServices can talk to other services internally, without routing through the public Internet. Here's an example how the new bindings configuration key enables that:Now the JavaScript frontend code can talk to the Python service internally via the URL stored in the BACKEND_INTERNAL_URL environment variable:Service-to-service traffic stays on the Vercel network rather than egressing to the public internet. Many independent services can become one application connected by the same wiring, rather than separate deployments that you stitch together across hosts.Framework-defined infrastructureMost frameworks run on Vercel with zero configuration. Framework-defined infrastructure means that each service's framework is auto-detected and auto-provisioned, from FastAPI and Flask for Python to Express and Hono for TypeScript, with first-class support for Go and Rust servers.Services run on Fluid compute, autoscaling with traffic, while you pay only for active CPU time. But framework-defined optimizations go even deeper. With Django, for example, we automatically detect where static assets live and serve them from the CDN.The full stack platformVercel Services gives Vercel a structured way to build and run your application.Those services run on a platform that includes everything any backend could need, whether you're building APIs, agents, or background workers: compute, data, networking, background work, and secure connections to external services.Isolated compute for agent servicesAgents can read files, run commands, and write code. But that capability needs to be secure. Vercel Sandbox gives each agent its own Linux computer: a filesystem, a shell, Docker support, and its own kernel, completely isolated from your deployments. Agents can execute code, grep files, and spin up Redis or Postgres as dependencies. Nothing inside the sandbox can touch your production environment.With automatic persistence, state carries between sessions, and on Pro, sandboxes can run for up to 24 hours.Real-time backends with WebSocket supportVercel Functions handle persistent WebSocket connections in every Vercel runtime, whether your backend is written in Node.js, Python, or Go. They work with standard WebSocket libraries like Socket.IO, and because connections run on Fluid compute with Active CPU pricing, you only pay for the time spent processing messages, not the time a connection sits idle.Reach external services with Vercel ConnectAgents and backends need to reach services outside your project (Slack, GitHub, managed databases), which usually means storing a long-lived secret in your environment. Vercel Connect replaces that with a short-lived credential your app requests at runtime, scoped to the task in front of it. There is no long-lived secret left to leak.Databases and storage for your servicesYou can provision a database from the Vercel Marketplace in a few clicks, with credentials injected for you, from providers like Neon, Supabase, and from AWS with Aurora PostgreSQL, Aurora DSQL, and DynamoDB. Amazon OpenSearch Serverless adds full-text and vector search, and Vercel Blob handles object storage. You can query and manage any of it without leaving Vercel, and both Blob and the AWS integrations authenticate with short-lived OIDC tokens rather than stored secrets.Run durable workflows and background jobsVercel Queues processes background jobs off the request path. Vercel Workflow handles durable multi-step processes that survive crashes and redeploys. And Vercel Cron runs work on a schedule. This is the part of a backend that outlives a request, and it runs on the same platform as everything else, so the long-running side of your backend needs no separate infrastructure.Connect privately and run on the right computeWhen a backend needs to reach a private database or an internal network instead of a public service, Secure Compute, static IPs, and VPC peering open that path.Functions run for up to 30 minutes on Pro and Enterprise, and Python backends deploy with up to 500mb of dependencies.Underneath all of it, Fluid compute is the default for new projects, and Active CPU pricing bills for the time your code is actually running rather than the time it waits, the right shape for idle-heavy backend and AI work.A single platform for everything you shipVercel Services brings your frontend, backend, and supporting services into one project. They build together, preview together, deploy together, and communicate internally by default.Combined with Vercel's built-in primitives for compute, data, queues, workflows, cron, secure networking, and sandboxed agent environments, you can run the full stack without stitching together separate platforms.To start composing services, read the Vercel Services documentation and the routing and communication guide. If you are new to running a backend on Vercel, the zero-config backends post is the place to begin. Read more
|
💡 WHY THIS MATTERS FOR YOUR ROLE
Understanding EventBridge enhancements is key for building robust, scalable, and manageable event-driven systems across enterprise accounts.
|
|
|
|
☁️ Enterprise Tech
via Vercel News • 1 min read
|
Core web app decisions tend to center the backend, due to its complexity and impact over huge swaths of the business.However, frontends have grown far more important and complex in their own right. When not prioritized, the intricate infrastructure around them can quickly spin out of control, dragging teams into untold amounts of tech debt.As decoupled architecture becomes more common, developers are turning to the Frontend Cloud to automate away the behind-the-scenes hassles of creating and growing dynamic websites.Instead of managing infrastructure as a separate step of the development process, the Frontend Cloud provisions global infrastructure for you, based on your existing application code. This approach to web development massively increases developer velocity, allowing your team to experiment safely and meet shifting market demands. Teams of all sizes can effortlessly scale global apps while maintaining the highest possible bars for performance, personalization, and security.You can think of the backend cloud as your cost center and the Frontend Cloud as your profit center. Read more
|
💡 WHY THIS MATTERS FOR YOUR ROLE
Recognizing the 'Frontend Cloud' is crucial for architects and leaders to allocate resources effectively to complex frontend infrastructure.
|
|
|
|
☁️ Enterprise Tech
via Netflix TechBlog - Medium • 10 min read
|
Samuel Yeboah, Francesco Di Chiara and Mingliang LiuToday, Netflix runs two Flink autoscalers. That is exactly one more than we want. We built the first one in-house years ago, when there was no mature option suited to our platform. The second came from the Apache Flink community, and it can scale workloads our homegrown system was never designed for. We now run both in production and are steadily converging on the open-source one. Along the way we learned some hard lessons about metrics, cost, and the real price of maintaining infrastructure you could instead adopt, and we hope they are useful whether you run a handful of Flink jobs or tens of thousands.Why autoscaling is not optional at our scaleNetflix has run stream processing on Apache Flink since 2017. As of 2026 we operate more than 30,000 Flink jobs across multiple AWS regions. Most are not deployed by hand; they are generated by our managed platform Data Mesh, so the majority of users never touch a Flink job directly. A smaller but growing set are custom jobs, built and operated by teams across the company for use cases like personalization, Ads, and Live events. They range from single-operator jobs that shuttle records between Kafka topics to stateful pipelines with branches, joins, and terabytes of state, and their load swings with daily cycles, launches, and regional failovers.Provisioning every one of those jobs for its peak is wasteful; provisioning for the average causes lag during surges. And in our platform a scaling action is not free: by default it means taking a savepoint, stopping the job gracefully, and restarting it at the new size, which for a large stateful job can take minutes. That leaves a genuinely hard question: how do you give each job the resources it needs, when it needs them, without a human in the loop and without breaking anything?The first autoscaler: watching from outsideOur first answer, built around 2019, was an autoscaler shaped like a stream-processing job. It ran on Mantis, consuming a live feed of cluster-level metrics from Atlas, our telemetry platform, including CPU, network, Kafka lag, input-rate, and consume-rate signals for every job. The scaler combined lag-derived catch-up time, CPU/network utilization thresholds, observed performance history, and regression over recent input rate to decide when to scale up or whether a smaller cluster could handle the lookahead window. Because the autoscaler operates independently of the Flink platform, it remains unaffected by issues within Flink itself. Building it as a streaming job also made it easy to scale. Each autoscaler node handled the metrics for a subset of Flink jobs, and we never had to write custom sharding or coordination logic to keep up with a growing Flink fleet. It reliably cut resource usage by 25–45% across thousands of managed pipelines. Check our previous talk at Flink Forward 2020.But watching from outside has a ceiling. The system reasoned about a whole cluster through coarse container metrics, and it scaled a single knob, the total TaskManager count, so every operator in a job moved together. That fit the simple, single-operator pipelines it was built for, but not the multi-operator, stateful DAGs that teams were increasingly bringing to us for Ads, recommendations, and games. Those were exactly the jobs it could not reason about, and supporting each new case meant more custom logic rather than any general capability.The autoscaler is only as good as the metrics served by external systems beneath it. Those metrics could miss real trouble: a job could be completely busy without any of it showing up as CPU utilization, leaving the job stuck in a degraded state the scaler had no way to see. Recently a networking migration quietly changed how some traffic was reported, and a subset of the Atlas metrics the scaler relied on stopped capturing everything accurately. The gap stayed invisible until it surfaced in production much later.It was time to reconsider build versus buy.The second autoscaler: reasoning from insideWhen we started, the Flink community had no mature autoscaler to offer. By the time we re-evaluated, it did: the Apache Flink Autoscaler. Instead of watching containers from outside, it reasons from inside the job.Its key idea is to estimate each operator’s true processing rate (TPR): the throughput it could sustain if it were fully busy. Flink reports, per subtask, the fraction of each second spent doing actual work, separate from time spent backpressured or idle. Dividing observed throughput by that busy fraction extrapolates capacity to full utilization: an operator handling 700 records/sec while busy 70% of the time has a TPR of 700 / 0.7 = 1,000 records/sec. Starting from the sources, the autoscaler walks the job graph and uses each operator’s TPR, its input/output ratios, and a target utilization to compute the parallelism every vertex needs so that no operator becomes the bottleneck, rather than resizing the whole cluster as a unit.The two approaches make a different contract, summarized below.The decisive difference for us is the last two rows: the OSS autoscaler can scale exactly the stateful, multi-operator jobs our homegrown system could not, and it lets each job carry its own configuration — stabilization periods, thresholds, and other scaling behavior tuned to the workload. That made it the natural fit for the custom jobs teams had been scaling by hand.Making it work at Netflix scaleAdopting the algorithm was straightforward; the community had done the hard part. The work for us was running it reliably across our own jobs, and this is where our system differs most from the stock open-source deployment.Firstly, the OSS autoscaler was originally architected to reside within the Kubernetes Operator for Flink, but our Flink platform runs on its own control plane, not that operator (see our previous talk at Current Conference 2024). The community later made a fantastic decision to keep the core logic as a standalone library. They refactored four generic interfaces that made it easy to plug directly into our internal ecosystem: a context carrying job metadata and REST API info, a state store, an event handler, and a realizer that applies scaling decisions.That service is a Spring Boot application whose orchestration runs on Temporal, the durable workflow engine. An orchestrator workflow polls our Flink control plane about once a minute for the jobs with autoscaling enabled, and starts one long-running workflow per job. Each per-job workflow pulls that job’s per-vertex metrics from its Flink JobManager, runs the OSS evaluation algorithm, and, when a scaling decision results, hands it to a realizer that actuates the change through our Flink control plane.The workflow-per-job design was a direct response to pain. We first ran evaluations in a single batch loop over the whole set of jobs, and it was fragile: one slow or misbehaving job could stall metric collection and scaling for every job behind it. Giving each job its own durable workflow isolated that blast radius, so a single problematic job now fails and retries on its own, and the runtime scales out as we onboard more jobs.Secondly, three engineering gaps stood between “works in community” and “works at Netflix scale”:Metric collection at high parallelism. On big jobs, pulling metrics from the JobManager became a bottleneck, and part of the cause was in Flink’s runtime. To address that, we changed the JobManager to cache transient metric names and clean them up once instead of rescanning on every fetch, and we added server-side filtering so the autoscaler asks only for the metrics it needs. This let the autoscaler work on jobs up to 3,000 Flink subtasks, where it had previously struggled above roughly 1,000. Those are in our internal fork of Flink release, while some are contributed upstream such as FLINK-36172.Preserving forward chaining. Two separate vertices joined by a forward connection must run at the same parallelism, because records are handed over in memory on a fixed local channel. Scale one of them alone and Flink does not fail; it silently converts that edge into a network shuffle. Our fork detects forward-connected subgraphs and scales each as a unit.Respecting sink limits. Some sinks have finite write capacity, so we added detection for async-sink backpressure (also a fork change) to keep the autoscaler from scaling a job up into a sink that cannot absorb more.Before it actuates anything, the realizer runs a set of safety checks. For example, it refuses to scale a job down in a region being evacuated during a company-wide region failover. It also verifies there is enough disk for the new cluster to hold the job’s checkpoint state, and it adds a small standby buffer for larger clusters.The road to one autoscalerLast year, the OSS-based autoscaler achieved general availability for custom jobs at Netflix, yielding promising initial outcomes. For instance, our client telemetry and logging team achieved a 58% reduction in its annualized Flink compute expenditures, saving approximately $1.1 million annually. This efficiency is driven by three key factors. First, whereas static provisioning must always account for peak loads, autoscaling dynamically adapts to daily cycles, capturing the drop in traffic during nights and weekends compared to weekday peaks. Second, rather than relying on teams to manually optimize resources following performance improvements or post-holiday slowdowns, the autoscaler continually adjusts capacity. Finally, adopting uniform container dimensions enables superior bin-packing and more granular scaling increments.Additionally, scaling down too eagerly is its own trap. Cut too deep and CPU saturates, lag spikes, and the system cannot react instantly because its metric window and stabilization period have to rebuild after each restart. We now run a target utilization of 0.45, below the community default of 0.7, deliberately trading a little efficiency for stability. Fewer and calmer rescales are worth the marginal cost for large stateful jobs.While our scaler provides fine-grained signals and vertex-level decision units for stateful DAGs, fast rescaling still heavily depends on Flink Core’s state restoration performance. Today, the biggest remaining cost in scaling a stateful job isn’t the scaler’s logic — it’s the restart and state recovery process itself. Flink 2 addresses this through its disaggregated state architecture, keeping state in external storage rather than on local disk, which can sharply reduce how much a rescale or recovery depends on total state size. Having started supporting Flink 2.2 at Netflix, we plan on experimenting with this new state backend to see if it can help eliminate state recovery bottlenecks when scaling large stateful jobs.Looking ahead, we aim to migrate all internal scaler use cases onto the new one based on OSS autoscaler to simplify our operational surface area.Key TakeawaysAlong the way, three lessons that generalize beyond Flink:Metric choice matters more than algorithm sophistication. Our most useful debugging was rarely about the scaling math; it was about which signal to trust most. Understand your metrics before you tune your algorithm.Set sensible defaults, but leave room to tune. Our managed jobs are similar enough that one good default covers most of them untouched, which is the point of a platform. But forcing a single configuration on every job punishes the ones that do not fit, so we pair defaults with per-job overrides and deliberately hide the knobs that need deep expertise. Most teams should never have to think about the autoscaler.Adopt, then extend. We built in-house because in 2019 nothing mature fit our platform. When a strong community project appeared, the right move was neither to defend our investment forever nor to rip it out overnight, but to adopt it for new workloads, contribute fixes back, and plan a deliberate migration.Thanks to the Flink and Data Mesh teams for the control-plane changes this work depended on, to the Temporal team and our early pilot teams, and to the Apache Flink autoscaler maintainers whose foundation we built on. Special thanks to Andy Zhang, Calvin Cheung, Daniel Trager, Guil Pires, Mark Cho, Matthew Kornitsky, Nikhil Sulegaon, Sujay Jain, and Tom Lee.A Tale of Two Flink Autoscalers was originally published in Netflix TechBlog on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.
|
💡 WHY THIS MATTERS FOR YOUR ROLE
Analyzing Flink autoscaling strategies from Netflix offers direct insights into optimizing performance and cost for large-scale data infrastructure.
|
|
|
|
How was today's dispatch?
Your 1-click feedback tunes our story selection algorithms for tomorrow.
|
|
🎁 VIP REFERRAL PROGRAM
Invite Colleagues, Unlock Executive Intelligence Pro
You have referred 0 colleagues.
Share your personal link to climb the reader leaderboard:
https://brief.delights.pro/join?ref=VIP
|
|
Share Your VIP Invite →
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
