? Curious Hacker Newsfront | about | examples | prompts | view on HN unofficial mirror
Launch HN: Rivet (YC W23) – Scale and Orchestrate Agents on S3 (github.com)
85 points by NathanFlurry 2026-11-05 | 44 comments | side by side | 0 rewritten | show 2 removed | updated 05:18 UTC

Hey HN, this is Nathan and Nicholas from Rivet (https://rivet.dev) – a fast, high-density, and scalable orchestrator for agentic workloads using the actor model. Rather than running a heavyweight sandbox per agent, each agent gets a lightweight actor backed by S3.

Actors provide a long-lived process for long agent turns, in-memory state for context, a WebSocket server for multiplayer, durable SQLite storage backed by S3, and hibernation when idle.

It's a similar model to Cloudflare Durable Objects, but it’s open source and self-hostable.

Here’s a video walkthrough: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ev6I7DOV9c

When we went through YC in 2023, we were building infrastructure for multiplayer games like Diep and Krunker. This involved heavily optimizing high-throughput matchmaking, real-time player messages, and blitz scaling. Through that process, we spent a lot of time on workloads where Postgres couldn't keep up with our throughput. We started out by hacking together Lua scripts on top of Redis, but this became too cumbersome to maintain and upgrade. This led us to extend our game server orchestrator to support what we call Rivet Actors today: many lightweight workers with in-memory state and durable storage. By using actors, we were able to serve tens of millions of monthly active users.

As agents grew in popularity, it became clear that running agents in sandboxes is inefficient. Sandboxes are expensive, mostly idle, and slow to start. Developers started using actors because they are far more memory efficient (72 KB baseline for actors vs 512 MB for a minimal sandbox) and fast to start (4.9 ms p99 for actors vs 1.7 s p99 for sandboxes).

For example, Amp is using Rivet to orchestrate multiplayer agents. They originally tried to build on Cloudflare Durable Objects, but couldn’t launch because of the platform’s limitations and unresponsive support. They migrated to Rivet Actors in a weekend and deploy on-prem. Rivet’s flexible architecture lets them adapt it to their own use cases without being constrained by a framework or the memory, storage, and runtime limits of Cloudflare Durable Objects.

Under the hood, Rivet is backed by S3 while maintaining SSD speeds.

Why S3? Previously, Rivet ran on FoundationDB. However, we were surprised to find that companies are storing orders of magnitude more data on Rivet Actors than in Postgres, such as large session transcripts, agent artifacts, and full POSIX filesystems. As their data grew, they had to start paying for SSDs that sat mostly idle with old transcripts. This led us to double down on S3 as our primary storage medium without sacrificing performance. This choice means that data stored on Rivet is 10× cheaper than on EBS gp3 while maintaining SSD speeds.

It’s not as simple as writing data straight to S3. Lots of PUTs for tiny blobs of data are slow and expensive. Instead, we use an SSD tier to optimize speed and cost:

When you write data to an actor’s SQLite database, the write is acknowledged once SSDs in 2 of 3 availability zones have it. Then, the data is batched to S3 in the background. This means that S3 is never on the write path, which lowers latency and cost. When reading data or waking an actor, Rivet reads from SSDs if already cached and falls back to S3 if not. SSD caches can be tuned to meet your needs, giving you configurable tiered storage for your actors.

This architecture lets Rivet provide 1.07 ms durable writes (3 AZ, p99), 1.36 ms reads (p99), and 138 ms reads from object storage (p99).

We’ve spent a lot of time making sure that Rivet can run wherever you need it. Self-hosting requires deploying a single Rust binary with S3 as the only dependency, Rivet Cloud lets you deploy dedicated clusters on AWS or GCP in any region, and BYOC lets us deploy Rivet to your VPC without having to operate it yourself. Rivet also runs identically in local dev as in production, since Rivet is a lightweight binary that runs anywhere

Rivet Actors can be written in TypeScript or Rust. Out of the box, they support agents (Pi Durable), workflows, real-time, multiplayer, running AI-generated code, Durable Streams, and integrations with tools like Vercel’s Eve and Turso. See all of our available guides, or point your agent at them: https://rivet.dev/docs/#guides

Try it out now, by reading our quickstart guides (https://rivet.dev/docs/) or ask your agent: “Run npx skills add rivet-dev/skills, then build a multiplayer chat agent and run it locally.”

We’d love to get feedback on your experience with Rivet! We’re deeply invested in making Rivet an easy-to-self-host, flexible, and efficient way to run agentic workloads.

GitHub: https://github.com/rivet-dev/rivet

Architecture: https://rivet.dev/docs/architecture/

Benchmarks: https://rivet.dev/docs/benchmarking/

Self-hosting: https://rivet.dev/docs/deploy/self-host/

 help


adsharma 2026-11-06 04:337/10informativefirst_hand | next [–]

Distributed actors are also good platforms to run graph algorithms. We're evaluating Rivet as a potential substrate to run page rank and clustering algorithms on large graphs, while supporting cypher queries over the result.

https://github.com/orgs/Latentpedia/discussions/4

Related work:

https://sigmodrecord.org/publications/sigmodRecord/1712/pdfs/05_systems_Spyropoulos.pdf

https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.01395

Distributed actors are also good platforms to run graph algorithms. We're evaluating Rivet as a potential substrate to run page rank and clustering algorithms on large graphs, while supporting cypher queries over the result.

https://github.com/orgs/Latentpedia/discussions/4

Related work:

https://sigmodrecord.org/publications/sigmodRecord/1712/pdfs/05_systems_Spyropoulos.pdf

https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.01395

Substantive first-hand use case for actors in graph algorithms, with links to related work.
kianN 2026-11-05 22:366/10first_handinsightful | prev | next [–]

> When you write data to an actor’s SQLite database, the write is acknowledged once SSDs in 2 of 3 availability zones have it. Then, the data is batched to S3 in the background. This means that S3 is never on the write path, which lowers latency and cost. When reading data or waking an actor, Rivet reads from SSDs if already cached and falls back to S3 if not. SSD caches can be tuned to meet your needs, giving you configurable tiered storage for your actors.

As someone who is not incredibly deep in the agent space, but works a lot on scientific and distributed computing, this really caught my eye. Seems like this is primarily part of the cloud offering, but a true posix compatible filesystem that interops cleanly with S3 on the backend would be an incredibly interesting product (especially if it were open-sourced).

A brief sidenote: I did a triple take when I saw the name because Rivet is the internal name of our long-running job queue service. You all have great taste.

> When you write data to an actor’s SQLite database, the write is acknowledged once SSDs in 2 of 3 availability zones have it. Then, the data is batched to S3 in the background. This means that S3 is never on the write path, which lowers latency and cost. When reading data or waking an actor, Rivet reads from SSDs if already cached and falls back to S3 if not. SSD caches can be tuned to meet your needs, giving you configurable tiered storage for your actors.

As someone who is not incredibly deep in the agent space, but works a lot on scientific and distributed computing, this really caught my eye. Seems like this is primarily part of the cloud offering, but a true posix compatible filesystem that interops cleanly with S3 on the backend would be an incredibly interesting product (especially if it were open-sourced).

A brief sidenote: I did a triple take when I saw the name because Rivet is the internal name of our long-running job queue service. You all have great taste.

Good-faith engagement with the storage design from a distributed computing perspective, with a concrete product idea.

Lots of ways to use S3 as a filesystem. FUSE is one. AWS even offers it as a service now.

Lots of ways to use S3 as a filesystem. FUSE is one. AWS even offers it as a service now.

Short but on-topic pointer to existing S3 filesystem options, with no hostility.

I hate to be that guy, but celld does essentially the same thing, no? It waits until persisted to another node OR stored in S3, but unless something has gone horribly wrong, this will essentially always be replicating to the other node first. (Admittedly, I recall it used to be just replicating to 1 node was considered stored, and if that went down it could be lost. I think it's two now, or at least the bug is filed. Prob how the write time was so low in celld, but perhaps wasn't sustainable)

Regardless, glad for more stateful serverless options, even if I am partial to what CloudFlare folks build :)

I hate to be that guy, but celld does essentially the same thing, no? It waits until persisted to another node OR stored in S3, but unless something has gone horribly wrong, this will essentially always be replicating to the other node first. (Admittedly, I recall it used to be just replicating to 1 node was considered stored, and if that went down it could be lost. I think it's two now, or at least the bug is filed. Prob how the write time was so low in celld, but perhaps wasn't sustainable)

Regardless, glad for more stateful serverless options, even if I am partial to what CloudFlare folks build :)

Good-faith technical comparison to Cloudflare's storage layer, with useful detail on its replication behavior.
kianN 2026-11-05 23:065/10first_handinformative | root | parent [–]

I'm not super familiar with celld, but my understanding is that its not a full posix filesystem. We work with lots of dynamically created and queried duckdb and netcdf files. My impression of celld is its meant for more lightweight storage and that objects live in SQLite files.

I could be totally mistaken but that's my current understanding.

I'm not super familiar with celld, but my understanding is that its not a full posix filesystem. We work with lots of dynamically created and queried duckdb and netcdf files. My impression of celld is its meant for more lightweight storage and that objects live in SQLite files.

I could be totally mistaken but that's my current understanding.

Good-faith, substantive comparison from real workload needs, with honest uncertainty.
xms17189 2026-11-06 01:377/10questioninsightful | prev | next [–]

Fascinating architecture—treating agent turns as persistent lightweight actors backed by tiered SQLite/S3 rather than spinning up dedicated VMs makes a lot of sense for latency and cost.

For workflows that inevitably require arbitrary shell execution or local compiler tools (like coding agents running tests), do you envision delegating just the side-effect execution out to ephemeral runners while keeping the stateful actor long-lived, or is Rivet primarily focused on API/tool-calling agents?

Fascinating architecture—treating agent turns as persistent lightweight actors backed by tiered SQLite/S3 rather than spinning up dedicated VMs makes a lot of sense for latency and cost.

For workflows that inevitably require arbitrary shell execution or local compiler tools (like coding agents running tests), do you envision delegating just the side-effect execution out to ephemeral runners while keeping the stateful actor long-lived, or is Rivet primarily focused on API/tool-calling agents?

Substantive architectural question about how side-effectful execution fits with long-lived actors.

Rivet is very cool. Switched a Cloudflare Durable Object piece of our infrastructure that lived in its own little fairy tale land to our own infra within the rest of our VPC. Was a very pleasant experience.

Haven't had the chance to try Rivet v3 yet but hoping to get to it soon.

Rivet is very cool. Switched a Cloudflare Durable Object piece of our infrastructure that lived in its own little fairy tale land to our own infra within the rest of our VPC. Was a very pleasant experience.

Haven't had the chance to try Rivet v3 yet but hoping to get to it soon.

A first-hand report of migrating from Durable Objects to Rivet, kept as written.

Appreciate the kind words, would love to hear feedback on v3 in our Discord when you upgrade!

Appreciate the kind words, would love to hear feedback on v3 in our Discord when you upgrade!

A founder's friendly reply inviting feedback; harmless, with little substance.
keeganpoppen 2026-11-05 19:522/10questionlow_effort | parent | prev [–]

fairy tale land?

fairy tale land?

A genuine short clarifying question about the parent's phrase.
fastball 2026-11-05 23:115/10first_handinformative | root | parent [–]

The rest of our infra is AWS + Vercel, so the CF DO stuff was in its own weird isolated space that had to be maintained and cared about separately.

The rest of our infra is AWS + Vercel, so the CF DO stuff was in its own weird isolated space that had to be maintained and cared about separately.

A plain first-hand answer about the operational cost of running Durable Objects apart from the rest of the stack.

Hey Nathan! You build a fantastic product and your tech seems rock solid. I think you would benefit from more use-case specific tutorials and how-to guides so that people find and use your product for the applications that it's a great fit for. Multi-agent systems, code review agents, software factories, etc.

More so than ever, folks are choosing to build rather than buy -- you should emphasize that your product lets teams avoid having to choose by handling the "boring" parts for them and letting them focus on the parts that are unique to their business.

Hey Nathan! You build a fantastic product and your tech seems rock solid. I think you would benefit from more use-case specific tutorials and how-to guides so that people find and use your product for the applications that it's a great fit for. Multi-agent systems, code review agents, software factories, etc.

More so than ever, folks are choosing to build rather than buy -- you should emphasize that your product lets teams avoid having to choose by handling the "boring" parts for them and letting them focus on the parts that are unique to their business.

Friendly, constructive product and positioning advice with a real point about build vs. buy.

Even as someone who’s very involved in the space, I don’t understand what you guys do. It’d be helpful if your website led with the problem you’re solving instead of technical benchmarks.

I also don’t really understand the distinction between an actor and an agent. I’ve never heard anyone call them actors, and I doubt you’ll win that mindshare as a small startup.

Even as someone who’s very involved in the space, I don’t understand what you guys do. It’d be helpful if your website led with the problem you’re solving instead of technical benchmarks.

I also don’t really understand the distinction between an actor and an agent. I’ve never heard anyone call them actors, and I doubt you’ll win that mindshare as a small startup.

Blunt but substantive feedback on positioning and terminology, with no personal swipe.

Man I was just coming here to say the same thing. I have a Ph.D. in CS and should be the target audience for this as a guy doing startup stuff that could easily try out a new architecture or tool.

I read "Rivet (https://rivet.dev) – a fast, high-density, and scalable orchestrator for agentic workloads using the actor model" and I think "I have no idea what this means, except it's a new way to make a backend service of some kind??"

I've reached an age where, if I don't understand what it is from your description, I'm not the problem.

Man I was just coming here to say the same thing. I have a Ph.D. in CS and should be the target audience for this as a guy doing startup stuff that could easily try out a new architecture or tool.

I read "Rivet (https://rivet.dev) – a fast, high-density, and scalable orchestrator for agentic workloads using the actor model" and I think "I have no idea what this means, except it's a new way to make a backend service of some kind??"

I've reached an age where, if I don't understand what it is from your description, I'm not the problem.

Blunt but legitimate feedback on unclear positioning from a would-be target user, aimed at the messaging and not at a person.
wsxiaoys 2026-11-05 21:406/10first_handinformative | prev | next [–]

Same problem here. Internally we simulated it with just-bash plus whatever filesystem was handy. For production we went with DO after surveying their agent ecosystem, but it has since split into two paths (@cloudflare/agents or think vs. @cloudflare/computer) with real trade-offs. Rivet's s3 setup looks like a much closer fit for us — I'd want to try it on the next project.

Same problem here. Internally we simulated it with just-bash plus whatever filesystem was handy. For production we went with DO after surveying their agent ecosystem, but it has since split into two paths (@cloudflare/agents or think vs. @cloudflare/computer) with real trade-offs. Rivet's s3 setup looks like a much closer fit for us — I'd want to try it on the next project.

First-hand account of building on Durable Objects and how its agent ecosystem has split, with a relevant comparison to Rivet.

Let us know how it goes! We're active in our Discord: https://rivet.dev/discord

We're big believers in lightweight sandboxing approachs akin to Durable Objects in addition to existing x86 sandboxes.

Let us know how it goes! We're active in our Discord: https://rivet.dev/discord

We're big believers in lightweight sandboxing approachs akin to Durable Objects in addition to existing x86 sandboxes.

Founder's friendly reply with a brief note on their sandboxing philosophy; nothing to moderate.
haseebws94 2026-11-05 18:406/10first_handquestion | prev | next [–]

Hey Nathan! I remember Rivet from Playflow, back when you guys did game server orchestration. Great to see you guys grow!

Have you had agents like claude code , codex etc all fully running in agent-os? Trying to understand the use case a bit better here. For context, I've recently built our own pipeline which spins up ephemeral linux vms for claude code, codex, etc which do their work & the state always persists but frees up resources when finished. Is the idea pretty much similar for agent-os here?

Also with the s3 backing changes, it reminds me a lot of the work done on celld, good to see more self-hostable durable objects out there.

Hey Nathan! I remember Rivet from Playflow, back when you guys did game server orchestration. Great to see you guys grow!

Have you had agents like claude code , codex etc all fully running in agent-os? Trying to understand the use case a bit better here. For context, I've recently built our own pipeline which spins up ephemeral linux vms for claude code, codex, etc which do their work & the state always persists but frees up resources when finished. Is the idea pretty much similar for agent-os here?

Also with the s3 backing changes, it reminds me a lot of the work done on celld, good to see more self-hostable durable objects out there.

Good-faith question from someone who built a similar ephemeral VM pipeline, with useful comparisons.
NathanFlurry 2026-11-05 19:028/10first_handinformativeinsightful | parent [–]

Been a minute since the gaming days, thanks for reaching out!

> Have you had agents like claude code , codex etc all fully running in agent-os?

We have gotten them all working inside of agentOS. However, we found it's a better architecture to run the agent loop outside of agentOS and expose it as tools. The trust boundary & blast radius of running the agent inside the sandbox makes it difficult.

Also, the memory overhead of running individual Claude Code instances is nuts, it's better to run the agents in a single process using tools.

I wrote a bit more on it here: https://rivet.dev/blog/2026-07-27-run-your-harness-outside-the-sandbox/

> Also with the s3 backing changes, it reminds me a lot of the work done on celld, good to see more self-hostable durable objects out there.

Appreciate it!

Rivet has a much different architecture than most S3-backed databases. Having an object-per-actor doesn't scale well with cost and performance, so we built a SSD tiered storage engine instead: https://rivet.dev/changelog/2026-10-26-introducing-rivet-3-0-preview/#warp-drive-bottomless-storage-with-the-speed-of-an-ssd

Ping me on Discord if you give it a try, would be fun to catch up: https://rivet.dev/discord

Been a minute since the gaming days, thanks for reaching out!

> Have you had agents like claude code , codex etc all fully running in agent-os?

We have gotten them all working inside of agentOS. However, we found it's a better architecture to run the agent loop outside of agentOS and expose it as tools. The trust boundary & blast radius of running the agent inside the sandbox makes it difficult.

Also, the memory overhead of running individual Claude Code instances is nuts, it's better to run the agents in a single process using tools.

I wrote a bit more on it here: https://rivet.dev/blog/2026-07-27-run-your-harness-outside-the-sandbox/

> Also with the s3 backing changes, it reminds me a lot of the work done on celld, good to see more self-hostable durable objects out there.

Appreciate it!

Rivet has a much different architecture than most S3-backed databases. Having an object-per-actor doesn't scale well with cost and performance, so we built a SSD tiered storage engine instead: https://rivet.dev/changelog/2026-10-26-introducing-rivet-3-0-preview/#warp-drive-bottomless-storage-with-the-speed-of-an-ssd

Ping me on Discord if you give it a try, would be fun to catch up: https://rivet.dev/discord

Founder gives first-hand architectural detail on running agent loops outside the sandbox and on tiered storage versus object-per-actor.

Congrats on the launch! Rivet seems neat; will definitely give it a spin.

> Sandboxes are expensive, mostly idle, and slow to start.

Many sandboxing startups would disagree. Do you have any numbers to support?

Congrats on the launch! Rivet seems neat; will definitely give it a spin.

> Sandboxes are expensive, mostly idle, and slow to start.

Many sandboxing startups would disagree. Do you have any numbers to support?

Friendly, genuine request for evidence behind a claim in the launch post.
NathanFlurry 2026-11-05 20:325/10first_handinformative | parent [–]

Appreciate it! Would love to hear feedback when you do: https://rivet.dev/discord

> Many sandboxing startups would disagree. Do you have any numbers to support?

There is no one-size-fits-all, but we're finding Rivet's benefits fit well for most agent workloads. I don't believe sandboxes are going away, but I think different workloads will move to specialized architectures.

Regarding cost, there are F500 companies using Rivet's tools for saving cost for use cases like RL.

Regarding coldstarts, it depends heavily on the use case, and there's not a one-size-fits-all. Benchmarks are pulled from Compute SDK sandbox benchmarks, more here: https://rivet.dev/docs/benchmarking/

Appreciate it! Would love to hear feedback when you do: https://rivet.dev/discord

> Many sandboxing startups would disagree. Do you have any numbers to support?

There is no one-size-fits-all, but we're finding Rivet's benefits fit well for most agent workloads. I don't believe sandboxes are going away, but I think different workloads will move to specialized architectures.

Regarding cost, there are F500 companies using Rivet's tools for saving cost for use cases like RL.

Regarding coldstarts, it depends heavily on the use case, and there's not a one-size-fits-all. Benchmarks are pulled from Compute SDK sandbox benchmarks, more here: https://rivet.dev/docs/benchmarking/

Founder answers the question directly with a benchmark link and a claim about cost use cases; civil and on-topic.
looplilt 2026-11-06 02:578/10insightfulquestion | prev | next [–]

Keeping S3 off the write path is the design choice that makes the whole pitch click for me: acknowledging a write once two of three availability zones have it on SSD, then batching to object storage in the background, gets durability without paying object-storage latency on every turn. That also explains why separating the agent loop from the sandbox matters, since a long-running turn shouldn't have to keep a heavyweight environment warm just to hold its state. My main question is how that tiering behaves when an actor wakes after a long idle period and its data has fully cooled to S3: is that 138 ms read the typical cost, or does it get worse with larger session transcripts and filesystems?

Keeping S3 off the write path is the design choice that makes the whole pitch click for me: acknowledging a write once two of three availability zones have it on SSD, then batching to object storage in the background, gets durability without paying object-storage latency on every turn. That also explains why separating the agent loop from the sandbox matters, since a long-running turn shouldn't have to keep a heavyweight environment warm just to hold its state. My main question is how that tiering behaves when an actor wakes after a long idle period and its data has fully cooled to S3: is that 138 ms read the typical cost, or does it get worse with larger session transcripts and filesystems?

Substantive analysis of the write-path design with a specific, genuine question about cold-read latency.

Congrats on the launch! The explanation of keeping S3 off the write path made the storage model much easier to understand. For someone starting with a small self-hosted deployment, what tends to be the first operational challenge as usage grows?

Congrats on the launch! The explanation of keeping S3 off the write path made the storage model much easier to understand. For someone starting with a small self-hosted deployment, what tends to be the first operational challenge as usage grows?

Genuine question about operational challenges of a small self-hosted deployment.

Hey! We’ve invested heavily in making self-hosting simple compared to the standard. Scaling up is just a matter of adding nodes.

We also provide guides for every major cloud, and no special tuning is required as you add nodes.

If you’re self hosting and have questions, please let us know on Discord or GitHub! https://rivet.dev/discord

Hey! We’ve invested heavily in making self-hosting simple compared to the standard. Scaling up is just a matter of adding nodes.

We also provide guides for every major cloud, and no special tuning is required as you add nodes.

If you’re self hosting and have questions, please let us know on Discord or GitHub! https://rivet.dev/discord

Founder's reply is civil and on topic, though it mostly promotes simplicity rather than naming a specific operational challenge.
SriniK 2026-11-05 20:076/10questioninsightful | prev | next [–]

Congrats! How is the security posture? Without really comparing isolation and sandboxing etc.. comparing with E2B is not the same.

Congrats! How is the security posture? Without really comparing isolation and sandboxing etc.. comparing with E2B is not the same.

A genuine, on-topic question about isolation and security that challenges the E2B comparison.
NathanFlurry 2026-11-05 20:276/10first_handinformative | parent [–]

Hey! Rivet includes a library for running untrusted user code called agentOS: https://rivet.dev/agentos/

It provides Linux-compatible sandboxing using V8 / WebAssembly. Supports full POSIX filesystems, networking stacks, and process trees. Security-wise, it's the same model as Cloudflare Workers & Chromium.

Rivet is frequently used for running the harness outside of the sandbox. Wrote a bit about why here: https://rivet.dev/blog/2026-07-27-run-your-harness-outside-the-sandbox/

Hey! Rivet includes a library for running untrusted user code called agentOS: https://rivet.dev/agentos/

It provides Linux-compatible sandboxing using V8 / WebAssembly. Supports full POSIX filesystems, networking stacks, and process trees. Security-wise, it's the same model as Cloudflare Workers & Chromium.

Rivet is frequently used for running the harness outside of the sandbox. Wrote a bit about why here: https://rivet.dev/blog/2026-07-27-run-your-harness-outside-the-sandbox/

Founder directly answers the security question with concrete details on the sandboxing model and links.

Wouldn't an agent in any capacity need a sandbox runtime to do agentic work? When you say "sandboxes are too slow" do you mean needing to boot the sandbox to get back Agent state? Is the idea that state/memory/context and runtime env are separate concepts in rivet?

(I'm a professional developer but don't do any orchestration so trying to understand from basic mental model pov)

Wouldn't an agent in any capacity need a sandbox runtime to do agentic work? When you say "sandboxes are too slow" do you mean needing to boot the sandbox to get back Agent state? Is the idea that state/memory/context and runtime env are separate concepts in rivet?

(I'm a professional developer but don't do any orchestration so trying to understand from basic mental model pov)

Genuine, well-framed questions probing the core architectural claim about sandboxes versus state.
k9294 2026-11-05 18:018/10informativeinsightful | parent | next [–]

There is a notion right now of decoupling the agent loop from the sandbox, so the sandbox isn't waiting for request-response from the agent. This would probably be 90+% of all the agent work.

If you combine this with products like Sprites from Fly.io (or OSS version - agent substrate), where you pay only per execution request in a sandbox, you can have huge savings compare to the event loop inside the sanbdox. You will be billed only for request executions (tens of milliseconds per read/write, hundreds of milliseconds per search, etc.) and zero for all the waiting time during the the inference phase.

Also, if you don't require a real Linux sandbox — you might actually emulate the environment, e.g. just-bash idea with linux-like environment to give agents something that looks like their native habitat, but under the hood, it can be just CF Durable Objects SQLite or whatever else.

Probably(?) almost all knowledge work doesn't require a Linux sandbox. You can just build a document reading and editing agent that does tool calls and connects to other products via MCPs, APIs, etc. And lightweight actors make a lot of sense to me in these cases.

There is a notion right now of decoupling the agent loop from the sandbox, so the sandbox isn't waiting for request-response from the agent. This would probably be 90+% of all the agent work.

If you combine this with products like Sprites from Fly.io (or OSS version - agent substrate), where you pay only per execution request in a sandbox, you can have huge savings compare to the event loop inside the sanbdox. You will be billed only for request executions (tens of milliseconds per read/write, hundreds of milliseconds per search, etc.) and zero for all the waiting time during the the inference phase.

Also, if you don't require a real Linux sandbox — you might actually emulate the environment, e.g. just-bash idea with linux-like environment to give agents something that looks like their native habitat, but under the hood, it can be just CF Durable Objects SQLite or whatever else.

Probably(?) almost all knowledge work doesn't require a Linux sandbox. You can just build a document reading and editing agent that does tool calls and connects to other products via MCPs, APIs, etc. And lightweight actors make a lot of sense to me in these cases.

Clear, substantive explanation of decoupling the agent loop from the sandbox, with concrete cost implications and examples.
NathanFlurry 2026-11-05 18:206/10first_handinformative | root | parent | next [–]

Exactly this.

> Also, if you don't require a real Linux sandbox — you might actually emulate the environment

We built agentOS for this: https://rivet.dev/agentos/

It provides Linux-compatible sandboxing using V8 / WebAssembly. Supports full POSIX filesystems, networking stacks, and process trees.

Exactly this.

> Also, if you don't require a real Linux sandbox — you might actually emulate the environment

We built agentOS for this: https://rivet.dev/agentos/

It provides Linux-compatible sandboxing using V8 / WebAssembly. Supports full POSIX filesystems, networking stacks, and process trees.

The founder gives a relevant, concrete pointer to their V8/WebAssembly sandbox, answering the parent's point about emulated environments.

This is a very helpful explanation, thank you. The part about basically duck-typing an Agent's environment and tool access is particularly insightful.

This is a very helpful explanation, thank you. The part about basically duck-typing an Agent's environment and tool access is particularly insightful.

Sincere thanks that highlights a specific idea from the parent, with no problem to fix.
NathanFlurry 2026-11-05 18:147/10first_handinformative | parent | prev [–]

Hey!

> Wouldn't an agent in any capacity need a sandbox runtime to do agentic work?

Developers on Rivet use 3 different patterns:

- Just agents: many agents just need tools, such as customer support or personal agents

- Agents with lightweight sandbox: Rivet provides a V8 / WebAssembly sandboxing library for running JS & Python with a filesystem, which covers most workloads like data analysis, file processing, evals, and code mode (https://rivet.dev/agentos/)

- Agent outside of the sandbox: expose the sandbox to the agent as tools, which is better for blast radius, trust boundary, and orchestration (see below)

> Is the idea that state/memory/context and runtime env are separate concepts in rivet?

Exactly, Rivet Actors support running the harness outside of the sandbox. It's often referred to "separation of head from the hands."

I wrote a bit about why a while back: https://rivet.dev/blog/2026-07-27-run-your-harness-outside-the-sandbox/

> When you say "sandboxes are too slow" do you mean needing to boot the sandbox to get back Agent state?

Specifically coldstarts. As LLMs are getting faster and have more realtime use cases, sandboxes are become the bottleneck on time to interactive for an agent.

Hey!

> Wouldn't an agent in any capacity need a sandbox runtime to do agentic work?

Developers on Rivet use 3 different patterns:

- Just agents: many agents just need tools, such as customer support or personal agents

- Agents with lightweight sandbox: Rivet provides a V8 / WebAssembly sandboxing library for running JS & Python with a filesystem, which covers most workloads like data analysis, file processing, evals, and code mode (https://rivet.dev/agentos/)

- Agent outside of the sandbox: expose the sandbox to the agent as tools, which is better for blast radius, trust boundary, and orchestration (see below)

> Is the idea that state/memory/context and runtime env are separate concepts in rivet?

Exactly, Rivet Actors support running the harness outside of the sandbox. It's often referred to "separation of head from the hands."

I wrote a bit about why a while back: https://rivet.dev/blog/2026-07-27-run-your-harness-outside-the-sandbox/

> When you say "sandboxes are too slow" do you mean needing to boot the sandbox to get back Agent state?

Specifically coldstarts. As LLMs are getting faster and have more realtime use cases, sandboxes are become the bottleneck on time to interactive for an agent.

The founder directly answers the question, explaining sandbox usage patterns and separating the harness from the sandbox.

Congratz on the launch! I love how efficient this is - I'm pretty sure more agents will be built this way than having the heavy sandbox. Quick note, in the README on GH there's a link to https://github.com/rivet-dev/rivet/blob/main/engine/packages/gasoline which doesn't lead anywhere.

Congratz on the launch! I love how efficient this is - I'm pretty sure more agents will be built this way than having the heavy sandbox. Quick note, in the README on GH there's a link to https://github.com/rivet-dev/rivet/blob/main/engine/packages/gasoline which doesn't lead anywhere.

Friendly reply with a brief opinion and a useful broken-link report; nothing to moderate.

Thanks Tim! Will get that fixed.

Thanks Tim! Will get that fixed.

Brief, friendly acknowledgement from the founder of a reported broken link.
stiiv 2026-11-05 18:076/10questioninsightful | prev | next [–]

What if I just want self-hostable TypeScript actors _without agents_? I'm a long-time fan of Akka et. al., but to my knowledge Node never got a proper framework.

What if I just want self-hostable TypeScript actors _without agents_? I'm a long-time fan of Akka et. al., but to my knowledge Node never got a proper framework.

Genuine question about using the actors without agents, drawing on experience with Akka.
NathanFlurry 2026-11-05 18:176/10first_handinformative | parent [–]

Hey! Rivet is pure actors at its core, there's nothing inherently specific to agents.

Instead, we provide an optional agent library that runs Pi Durable on top of actors (https://rivet.dev/agents/docs/quickstart/) or you can write your agent from scratch if you choose.

Hey! Rivet is pure actors at its core, there's nothing inherently specific to agents.

Instead, we provide an optional agent library that runs Pi Durable on top of actors (https://rivet.dev/agents/docs/quickstart/) or you can write your agent from scratch if you choose.

Founder directly answers the question, explaining that the core is plain actors and the agent layer is optional.

Been running Rivet v3 self-hosted on AWS and it's dope!

Been running Rivet v3 self-hosted on AWS and it's dope!

Short but genuine first-hand report of running the product self-hosted on AWS.

Love to hear it! Don't hesitate to share feedback in our Discord: https://rivet.dev/discord

Love to hear it! Don't hesitate to share feedback in our Discord: https://rivet.dev/discord

Friendly founder reply inviting feedback; harmless and in good faith, though it adds little substance.

Interesting idea, horrible ux atm though, my codex/claude whatever is just as confused as me what and how are we supposed to use it exactly and all the edge cases. Hope you folks can figure out some interesting ideas to improve it though.

Interesting idea, horrible ux atm though, my codex/claude whatever is just as confused as me what and how are we supposed to use it exactly and all the edge cases. Hope you folks can figure out some interesting ideas to improve it though.

Blunt product feedback aimed at the UX, not at people, with a real experience of coding agents struggling to use it.
NathanFlurry 2026-11-05 18:183/10first_handquestion | parent [–]

Hey! Can you share a bit more about what your agent is saying so we can fix this? Would love to chat with you in Discord too: https://rivet.dev/discord

Hey! Can you share a bit more about what your agent is saying so we can fix this? Would love to chat with you in Discord too: https://rivet.dev/discord

Founder responds in good faith to criticism by asking for specifics so the problem can be fixed.
esafak 2026-11-05 18:446/10insightfulquestion | prev | next [–]

My first reaction: this is weird; agentic workloads have many problems but orchestration speed ain't one of them. You spend most of the time waiting for the model! Is this for small models?

I would have lead with the durability aspect.

My first reaction: this is weird; agentic workloads have many problems but orchestration speed ain't one of them. You spend most of the time waiting for the model! Is this for small models?

I would have lead with the durability aspect.

Substantive, good-faith critique of the pitch: model latency dominates, so durability is the stronger selling point.

this is for people/products that run dozens/hundreds of agents concurrently.

this is for people/products that run dozens/hundreds of agents concurrently.

Short, direct answer to the parent's question about who this is for.
chicagobuss 2026-11-05 18:577/10questioninsightful | prev | next [–]

looks cool - I'm curious how this is similar / different from celld

..and how you're doing anything with s3-backing durably and safely with latency numbers less than several hundred ms

looks cool - I'm curious how this is similar / different from celld

..and how you're doing anything with s3-backing durably and safely with latency numbers less than several hundred ms

Genuine technical questions comparing the project to celld and probing how S3 durability squares with low latency.

In OP

> It’s not as simple as writing data straight to S3. Lots of PUTs for tiny blobs of data are slow and expensive. Instead, we use an SSD tier to optimize speed and cost:

> When you write data to an actor’s SQLite database, the write is acknowledged once SSDs in 2 of 3 availability zones have it. Then, the data is batched to S3 in the background. This means that S3 is never on the write path, which lowers latency and cost. When reading data or waking an actor, Rivet reads from SSDs if already cached and falls back to S3 if not. SSD caches can be tuned to meet your needs, giving you configurable tiered storage for your actors.

In OP

> It’s not as simple as writing data straight to S3. Lots of PUTs for tiny blobs of data are slow and expensive. Instead, we use an SSD tier to optimize speed and cost:

> When you write data to an actor’s SQLite database, the write is acknowledged once SSDs in 2 of 3 availability zones have it. Then, the data is batched to S3 in the background. This means that S3 is never on the write path, which lowers latency and cost. When reading data or waking an actor, Rivet reads from SSDs if already cached and falls back to S3 if not. SSD caches can be tuned to meet your needs, giving you configurable tiered storage for your actors.

Directly answers the parent's durability and latency question by quoting the relevant explanation from the post.
chicagobuss 2026-11-06 02:246/10informativeinsightful | root | parent [–]

Got it. This is the og confluent cloud architecture, then. That much data crossing availability zones might surprise people people on AWS since that will add at least $0.04 for every gb sent in

Got it. This is the og confluent cloud architecture, then. That much data crossing availability zones might surprise people people on AWS since that will add at least $0.04 for every gb sent in

Substantive comparison to Confluent Cloud's architecture plus a concrete note on AWS cross-AZ transfer costs.

[flagged]

[flagged]
bigbuppo 2026-11-05 18:22 | removed0/10jokeoff_topictangential_annoyance | prev | next [–]

Ooh, so mod_rivet is getting funding? That's great. Tcl does not get enough love these days.

Ooh, so mod_rivet is getting funding? That's great. Tcl does not get enough love these days.

A joke about the name collision with Apache's Tcl module that doesn't engage with the project.
realty_geek 2026-11-05 17:552/10tangential_annoyancelow_effortkept_for_replies | prev [–]

Ah, another rivet. I initially thought it was a pivot of:

https://rivet.ironcladapp.com/

Ah, another rivet. I initially thought it was a pivot of:

https://rivet.ironcladapp.com/

A harmless name-collision remark, not hostile, and the reply needs it for context.

Me too... the Rivet from Ironclad was amazing for its time (when GPT3 came out). I don't think the developer realised how huge it could have been.

Me too... the Rivet from Ironclad was amazing for its time (when GPT3 came out). I don't think the developer realised how huge it could have been.

A harmless, on-topic recollection of the similarly named Ironclad Rivet tool, with a minor opinion on its potential.
NathanFlurry 2026-11-05 18:00 | removed0/10joketropelow_effort | parent | prev [–]

<insert spiderman meme here>

<insert spiderman meme here>

A bare meme reference with no substance beyond the joke.



About | Details | Examples | Prompts | This page on Hacker News | HN Guidelines | Data: HN API

Curious Hacker News is an unofficial, experimental mirror and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by Hacker News or Y Combinator. Original comments are by their authors on news.ycombinator.com; rewritten text is AI-generated and was not written by the commenter.