Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add option to only display nodes/pods that are above/over a specified resource utilization threshold #97

Open
dpedu opened this issue May 5, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@dpedu
Copy link

dpedu commented May 5, 2023

This is a suggestion for a feature to add to kube-capacity that I believe would be useful, at least for myself.

Add command line flags to only display nodes/pods that are above/over a specified resource utilization threshold.

Examples:

  • kube-capacity --max-mem-limit 50 - would only list nodes where the sum of memory limits of pods on the node are 50% or less of the node's memory capacity.
  • kube-capacity --min-mem-limit 50 - only list nodes where the above calculation is 50% or more
  • --max-mem-request and --min-mem-request should be self-explanatory given the above - same logic, but requests instead of limits.
  • --max-cpu-limit, --min-cpu-limit, --max-cpu-request, --min-cpu-request would work the same as the above flags, but for cpu requests/limits instead of memory.

I think these filters would make it easier to spot nodes that have low or high utilization. Currently, the tool lists all nodes/pods in a list, which is not ideal as one needs to manually look through this list, which is difficult for large clusters. Myself, I deal with some clusters with 100+ nodes and manually looking through the list of all nodes inconvenient. Since I want and expect my nodes to have >80% utilization, having filters like these would allow folks to configure this tool to output only nodes of concern, which is a better user experience.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant