Adding karpenter.sh/nodeclaim-name:<nodeclaim-name> as label to a node

[balraj-aqfer]

Description

What problem are you trying to solve?

This label is required to identify which bin-pack value of the resource request triggered the creation of an instance.

How important is this feature to you?
It is needed to identify the pod binpack overhead in our kubernetes clusters

• Please vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction to the original issue to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
• Please do not leave "+1" or "me too" comments, they generate extra noise for issue followers and do not help prioritize the request
• If you are interested in working on this issue or have submitted a pull request, please leave a comment

[k8s-ci-robot]

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If Karpenter contributors determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

[njtran]

We previously attempted to do this here: #996 but it got put on the backburner in favor of other PRs. Let us know if you're interested in implementing!

[balraj-aqfer]

I appreciate the update and understand that other priorities may have taken precedence.

I am indeed interested in contributing to Karpenter and would like to explore this further. However, I would appreciate some guidance on the internal source and architecture to better understand how I can effectively contribute to this effort. If there are any resources or documentation you could share, I would be grateful.

[njtran]

@Balraj06 I think the best guidance would be the previous PR I linked. You should be aware that this might be a deceptively harder thing to implement, since adding this as a label allows it to be potentially scheduled on with pods. We'd likely want to remove this from an allowable scheduling constraint in our simulations. Feel free to reach out in karpenter-dev for further advice.