Search code examples
amazon-web-servicescamundaaws-step-functionscamunda-modeler

AWS step functions vs Camunda for workflow


I am not sure if I am comparing Apples to Oranges, but both Camunda and Step Functions of AWS seem to address the same thing: Workflows. Help me with the comparison of both, which to use when. Are they replaceable?


Solution

  • You are not comparing apples to oranges. Both tools are workflow engines.

    As a background read, the comparison is also discussed for example here: https://forum.camunda.org/t/bpmn-vs-aws-step-function/5460.

    Differences in essence:

    • Process modeling language (Proprietary Amazon State Language vs. standardized BPMN supporting more language constructs from http://www.workflowpatterns.com/)
    • Visualization of process models for different stakeholders (simple auto-generated for Step Functions, BPMN for Camunda)
    • Architecture possibilities (Step functions are cloud-only and even AWS-only, but then of course integrated in the AWS world; Camunda is independent and can run in any environment, but also needs additional work to integrate with AWS).

    As a rule of thumb:

    • Use Step Functions if you have quite technical workflows that need to work only in the AWS world
    • Use Camunda in all other cases, including more hybrid environments and "bigger" processes

    I also described this more in https://processautomationbook.com/