include similar nodegroups in gRPC expander options

[BenHinthorne]

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

Related to #6940

This PR updates the gRPC expanders Options request to include SimilarNodegroupIds. The purpose of adding this option is two fold:

• So that users can use the similar nodegroups as part of their best options filtering via the gRPC expander.
• When used alongside the flag to skip similar nodegroup recomputation introduced in this PR, this would allow users to also filter which similar nodegroups would be included as part of the option. This allows for a more granular customization of the scaling options by the user, via their custom gRPC expander.

An example use case for why users may want to filter the similar nodegroups in the gRPC expander is to filter nodegroups by a maximum number of nodes per zone, to prevent scaling in zones that experience IP Exhaustion (see issue). Another example would be that this allows users to prevent upscaling in zones in which they may have an outage, via filtering out these options via their gRPC expander.

It's also worth noting that the the other built-in expanders have SimilarNodegroups included by default, because the expander.Option type includes similar nodegroups, it was only the *protos.Option type which did not.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #6940

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Include Similar NodeGroup Ids in the gRPC expander's options.

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

[linux-foundation-easycla]

• ✅login: BenHinthorne / (f3a7f1f)

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @BenHinthorne!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/autoscaler 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes/autoscaler has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @BenHinthorne. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: BenHinthorne
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign x13n for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• cluster-autoscaler/OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment