<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Cost Control on Mengboy 技术笔记</title>
    <link>https://www.mfun.ink/tags/cost-control/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Cost Control on Mengboy 技术笔记</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- 0.156.0</generator>
    <language>zh-cn</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2026 16:33:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://www.mfun.ink/tags/cost-control/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Go &#43; OpenAI Responses Agent Memory Layering: Short-Term Context, Long-Term Index, and Cost Caps</title>
      <link>https://www.mfun.ink/english/post/go-openai-responses-agent-memory-layering/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2026 16:33:52 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.mfun.ink/english/post/go-openai-responses-agent-memory-layering/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;In production Go agents, the first thing that breaks is usually not model quality. It is memory management: context grows, bills spike, and answers drift.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Use a 3-layer memory design:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;L1: short-term conversational window (seconds)&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;L2: rolling summary (minutes)&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;L3: long-term retrieval memory (days)&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Go &#43; OpenAI Responses Agent 记忆分层实战：短期上下文、长期索引与成本封顶</title>
      <link>https://www.mfun.ink/2026/03/18/go-openai-responses-agent-memory-layering/</link>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2026 16:33:52 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.mfun.ink/2026/03/18/go-openai-responses-agent-memory-layering/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;你在 Go 里做 Agent，最容易翻车的不是推理能力，而是“记忆”失控：上下文越来越长、账单越来越高、回答却越来越飘。&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;这篇给你一个可落地的三层方案：&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;L1：短期会话上下文（秒级，强相关）&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;L2：中期摘要记忆（分钟级，压缩）&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;L3：长期检索记忆（天级，向量索引）&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>OpenAI Batch API &#43; Go 降本实战：离线拆批、失败重放与成本边界</title>
      <link>https://www.mfun.ink/2026/03/13/openai-batch-api-go-cost-control-offline-batching-failure-replay/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 01:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.mfun.ink/2026/03/13/openai-batch-api-go-cost-control-offline-batching-failure-replay/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;一句话结论：如果你的调用是&lt;strong&gt;可延迟、可批处理、可回放&lt;/strong&gt;，就该把在线请求下沉到 Batch API；省钱最明显，但前提是你把拆批、失败分流和回放链路先做好。&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;很多团队把 Batch API 当“便宜版同步接口”来用，结果不是省钱，而是把失败样本堆成事故池。真正的保守做法是：先定义成本边界和SLO，再做离线拆批与失败回放。&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>OpenAI Batch API with Go: Offline Batching, Failure Replay, and Cost Boundaries</title>
      <link>https://www.mfun.ink/english/post/openai-batch-api-go-cost-control-offline-batching-failure-replay/</link>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2026 01:08:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://www.mfun.ink/english/post/openai-batch-api-go-cost-control-offline-batching-failure-replay/</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Short answer: if your workload is &lt;strong&gt;delay-tolerant, batchable, and replay-safe&lt;/strong&gt;, move it from online calls to Batch API. The savings are real, but only if you design splitting, failure routing, and replay first.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Many teams treat Batch API as a cheaper sync endpoint. That usually creates a replay mess instead of stable savings. A conservative rollout starts with cost boundaries and SLOs, then implements offline batching and controlled replay.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
