Live data from Hacker News

MicroVMs: Run isolated sandboxes with full lifecycle control

aws.amazon.com

61–70 of 222 posts

Re: MicroVMs: Run isolated sandboxes with full lifecycle control

#61
post #18

What's the best provider to self-host Firecracker? I feel that AWS is not a safe or cost-effective option for a self-funded startup or small business. Although is anything cost effective anymore? Hetzner just had a massive price hike. Part of it might just be that I am old and inflation is catching up with my understanding of prices. But as far as AWS I still have to say no thanks. Imagine some group actually started…

Are you looking for highly ephemeral nodes, where you are writing automation that will use the API to orchestrate it? Or do you just want small microVMs that you launch and kill?

Firecracker just has a ReSTful unix socket with a defined API and launches KVM vms with limited options.

For custom SMB I still think libvirt is a lower entry cost and may have transferable use cases to longer lived VMs, so you can just launch a qemu microvm[0] and use virsh and/or libvirt xml to set up the networking.

The ~400ms boot time of a qemu microvm vs ~120ms for firecracker may not be an issue for some loads, but qemu will also allow you a bit more density of placement than firecracker. qemu microvms will use a bit more memory individually, but they will also tend to use less real system memory with a larger number of microVMs.

It is all tradeoffs, and kata containers are yet another option that may apply depending on your use case.

You can run your own firecracker or qemu/kvm microvms on most instances that allow nested hypervisors, or on a local host. If cost containment is critical to you this is one possible way forward.

Really it just depends on if you want/need ReSTful control, or need to support short lived serverless functions, or if CLIs fit better and you many want to support full VMs.

They both are just Virtual Machine Monitors that targeted different use cases and decided on different tradeoffs.

Just be careful about hosting traditional containers and microVMs on the same system, that config is going to be problematic do to fundamental reasons that are too complex to properly address here.

[0] https://www.qemu.org/docs/master/system/i386/microvm.html

Re: MicroVMs: Run isolated sandboxes with full lifecycle control

#62
post #37
post #18

What's the best provider to self-host Firecracker? I feel that AWS is not a safe or cost-effective option for a self-funded startup or small business. Although is anything cost effective anymore? Hetzner just had a massive price hike. Part of it might just be that I am old and inflation is catching up with my understanding of prices. But as far as AWS I still have to say no thanks. Imagine some group actually started…

Why do you want to self-host vs. using one of the many providers out there? Daytona, E2B, OpenComputer, Freestyle, Blaxel, Vercel, Modal, Cloudflare, Tensorlake, Superserve, etc. etc. Some of them work by pre-purchasing credits, so you can control the blast radius of spend. Also, if you want a more embedded sandbox runtime as a library instead of a daemon + REST API, you can check out libkrun (and friendly layers on…

Even with the Hetzner price increase, it is still far cheaper than all of them with self-hosting.

Re: MicroVMs: Run isolated sandboxes with full lifecycle control

#64

I don’t get it we are paying at least hundreds or maybe thousands per month on ai costs. Just get a regular vm ?

You absolutely can run agents on a regular VM. But if you want to build multi-tenant and multi-agent systems with strong security boundaries, then having a VM or MicroVM per agent session (or session with a group of agents) really simplifies things.

When we did AWS AgentCore Runtime last year we introduced session isolation, with MicroVMs per session. You can think of Lambda MicroVMs as the same stack, but generalized to fit a larger number of application patterns.

Re: MicroVMs: Run isolated sandboxes with full lifecycle control

#65

It's about time AWS got into the agent sandbox game. The startups in this space right now don't provide much value on top of the cloud providers they're wrapping. They don't tend to be run by experienced infra people either so they seem very vibecoded, insecure, janky, etc. They're also significantly overpriced because they're marking up already expensive providers. Something surprising from my own experience is that…

Major Sandbox providers (e.g. Modal) run on non-hyperscaler bare metal not AWS and so don't need to markup on AWS's markup. Thus, prices are comparable or better than AWS.

Re: MicroVMs: Run isolated sandboxes with full lifecycle control

#66
post #61
post #18

What's the best provider to self-host Firecracker? I feel that AWS is not a safe or cost-effective option for a self-funded startup or small business. Although is anything cost effective anymore? Hetzner just had a massive price hike. Part of it might just be that I am old and inflation is catching up with my understanding of prices. But as far as AWS I still have to say no thanks. Imagine some group actually started…

Are you looking for highly ephemeral nodes, where you are writing automation that will use the API to orchestrate it? Or do you just want small microVMs that you launch and kill? Firecracker just has a ReSTful unix socket with a defined API and launches KVM vms with limited options. For custom SMB I still think libvirt is a lower entry cost and may have transferable use cases to longer lived VMs, so you can just laun…

Thanks. I just looked into qemu microvms. Might be an option but I already have gvisor set up.

Re: MicroVMs: Run isolated sandboxes with full lifecycle control

#67

Shouldn’t the title be “AWS Lambda MicroVMs”? MicroVMs are an existing concept.

Yeah, I'm surprised Justin posted this like it was new(s). Wasn't it doing the rounds on the 22nd when it launched?

I didn't post it 3 hours ago, it must have gone through the magic HN re-up process.

Re: MicroVMs: Run isolated sandboxes with full lifecycle control

#68

I don’t get it we are paying at least hundreds or maybe thousands per month on ai costs. Just get a regular vm ?

Isn’t the point that you wanna be able to spin up and down thousands of VM:s on demand (literally a VM just to run a tool and then shut it down until the next tool call)

Re: MicroVMs: Run isolated sandboxes with full lifecycle control

#69
post #30
post #18

What's the best provider to self-host Firecracker? I feel that AWS is not a safe or cost-effective option for a self-funded startup or small business. Although is anything cost effective anymore? Hetzner just had a massive price hike. Part of it might just be that I am old and inflation is catching up with my understanding of prices. But as far as AWS I still have to say no thanks. Imagine some group actually started…

Hetzner is still cheap compared to AWS.

You can't run firecracker on AWS.

Re: MicroVMs: Run isolated sandboxes with full lifecycle control

#70

What's the point of microVMs for running agents? Are you guys literally spinning up agents where a 100 ms boot time vs a 3 seconds boot time makes a difference? I'm asking because I understand the appeal of micro VMs but every time the subject comes up people talk about "isolating agents": what's wrong about isolating agents in a regular VM (or in a container which, itself, is in a VM)? FWIW I've got my stuff nicely…

This is for people who want both faster execution, and better security isolation for agents/subagents. It is a different use case than yours

I understand that but micro VMs don't provide better security isolation than regular VMs.

So that leaves faster boot times.

Faster boot times and then the agent does what? And at how many token/s? And what's the "time to first token" anyway?

How do the time to first token and then the token/s inherent limitations of LLMs not totally dominate the running time?

I just don't get the use case.

Post reply on HN