[nikolayasdf123]

> Agents are not Microservices

> Agents naturally align with OOP principles: they maintain encapsulated state (their memory), expose methods (their tools and decision-making capabilities via inference pipelines), and communicate through message passing

it does sound like a service (memory=db,methods+messages=api). it is just the level of isolation/deployment you need

UPD: also, how come your services share database layer (?), maybe problems in scaling are not due to Agents at all? do you have scaling issues even without agents? would not be surprised! classic rule form Amazon 2002 API mandate by Bezos "no shared db between services. all communication happens over exposed interfaces and over network".

[pcalcado]

By database layer, do you mean the RDS in the diagrams?

If so, they were logical diagrams; the deployment itself was more complicated to handle the realities of AWS and whatnot.

Still, having a single beefy RDS instance is a pretty common pattern for apps at this size. I've never experienced RDS postgres as a bottleneck for standard microservices architectures even at the 100-million-MAU scale.

[tossandthrow]

What I read is that the cut for microservices and agents do not align.

This does not mean that agents can not run in microservices, just that is is not 1:1 between agent and a microservice.

[pcalcado]

Yes, that's what I meant.

There's a whole can of worms here around the "what is a microservice, anyway?" but I tried to avoid more philosophical questions and used the term as shorthand for "small deployable unit following some version of 12 factor for horizontal scalability." It's not super comprehensive but matches what I've seen in practice over the last decade+