mitsuhiko demos why sharing one worker for AI agent code execution ends in OOM kills
mitsuhiko · x · 2026-10-10
Developer mitsuhiko responded to whether running AI agent-generated code in a separate worker is enough: with only basic isolation and a shared worker, an infinite loop exhausts memory and kills the worker.
He adds that switching to QuickJS doesn't help either — the problem is the infinite loop itself, not the isolation boundary. A concrete look at the trade-offs in sandboxing code execution for agents.
Related event: mitsuhiko warns AST interpreters alone are not enough to sandbox agent code(8 posts)→
More from coding & agent
- Vibe-coded slop vs human slop: quality comes from taste, intention and time — cameronstow · 2026-10-10
- Engineer Argues Abstractions Hurt AI Agents: 95% of Cases Better Raw — zack_overflow · 2026-10-10
- Testing proactive AI agents on my email and calendar: dot caught a date mixup, Muse is noisy — hazelcough · 2026-10-10
- Personal AI agents are stickier than you think: one now learns work habits and builds its own CRM — thisiskp_ · 2026-10-10
- Creator finds hand-tweaking generative models faster than prompts, sees room beyond text UIs — keenanisalive · 2026-10-10
- "Do better!" prompting stalls fast; even top VLMs understand images unevenly — keenanisalive · 2026-10-10