For full text search please use the '?' prefix. e.g. ? Onboarding

Zeebe Vs Activiti

Zeebe vs Activit

Zeebe and Activiti are both popular open-source workflow and business process management (BPM) engines, but they cater to slightly different use cases and have distinct architectures and features.

Zeebe:

  1. Architecture:

    • Microservices-Oriented: Zeebe is designed with microservices in mind. It is a distributed, horizontally scalable workflow engine that can handle high throughput and large volumes of workflow instances.
    • Event-Driven: Zeebe is built for event-driven architectures, making it well-suited for modern cloud-native applications where workflows are triggered by events.

  2. Performance and Scalability:

    • High Throughput: Zeebe is designed to scale horizontally, meaning it can handle a large number of workflow instances concurrently, making it ideal for high-traffic applications.
    • Cloud-Native: Zeebe is optimized for deployment in cloud environments like Kubernetes, where scalability and fault tolerance are critical.

  3. Target Use Cases:

    • Event-Driven Microservices: Zeebe is particularly strong in scenarios where workflows need to be integrated into microservices architectures.
    • Large-Scale Process Automation: It’s ideal for applications that require processing thousands or millions of workflow instances.

  4. Supported By:

    • Zeebe is developed and supported by Camunda as part of the Camunda Cloud platform, which also includes advanced features like monitoring and analytics.

Activiti:

  1. Architecture:

    • Traditional BPMN Engine: Activiti is a more traditional BPMN (Business Process Model and Notation) workflow engine. It has a monolithic architecture, although it can be deployed in a microservices architecture.
    • Java-Based: Activiti is a lightweight BPMN engine built primarily in Java, making it easy to integrate with Java-based applications.

  2. Performance and Scalability:

    • Single Instance Deployment: Activiti is designed for deployment in single-instance or clustered environments but doesn’t scale as naturally or horizontally as Zeebe.
    • Good for Mid-Sized Workflows: While it performs well for moderate workflow loads, Activiti may face limitations when dealing with very high-throughput environments.

  3. Target Use Cases:

    • Traditional BPMN Workflows: Activiti is well-suited for organizations looking to implement standard BPMN workflows in enterprise applications.
    • Integration with Java Applications: Activiti integrates seamlessly with Java applications and is a good choice for Java-heavy environments.

  4. Supported By:

    • Activiti was originally developed by Alfresco and is now maintained by the Activiti community. It has a large user base and many extensions available.

Comparison Summary:

  • Zeebe: Best for cloud-native, event-driven microservices architectures that require high scalability and throughput. It is the go-to option for modern, large-scale distributed systems.
  • Activiti: Best for traditional BPMN-based workflows, particularly in Java-centric environments. It’s more suited for medium-scale workflows and enterprise applications that don’t require the scale and distribution capabilities of Zeebe.

References: