Feature Comparison Among Workflow Engines (Part 1)
Feature Comparison Among
Workflow Engines
Introduction
In this post I compare workflow engines base on factors which are important in every process-driven application.
Factors that I considered are as below :
1.Support of workflow architectures : State Machine, Sequential, Flowchart
2.Event-driven built-in framework for alerts
(with this feature we can have event raised by reaching a threshold like getting out of stocks in repository and
associate workflow with events.)3.Security handling
4.support of pause, Hold, ... states
5.Parallel activities (fork / join)
6.Work tracking and logging (Activity and Event)
7.Building custom activities
8.Graphical workflow designer
9.Runtime workflow alteration
(Like changing an IF condition based on runtime)10.Database they support natively
11.Interoperability and Integration with other systems
(Like share point, Biztalk server, WCF, MSMQ)12.Other systematic prerequisites
(Like specific version of .net framework)13.Performance under heavy load
14.Central exception handling
15.Developer company future support
(For releasing service packs and new features)16.Staff training complexity
17.Interaction Languages
(Is there any intermediary language for communication with workflow?)18.Design workflow in Code, Designer and ...
In the blow table I will compare four famous products in workflow industry .
| Feature |
Skelta |
WF4 |
K2 | Stateless |
| Workflow architectures |
Flowchart |
Sequential - Flowchart - State machine (using CTP State machine) |
Flowchart |
State machine |
| Event-Driven built-in framework |
Yes |
Yes |
Yes |
Must be implemented |
| Security Handling |
Internal Security system |
Integrated with .net security |
Internal Security system |
Must be implemented |
| Stop, Pause, Hold | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO |
| Parallel activities | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO |
| Work Tracking and logging | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Must be implemented |
| Custom activities | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Must be implemented |
| Graphical designer | Yes | Yes | Yes | NO |
| Runtime workflow alteration | NO | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Supported Databases | Any | Any | SQL | Any |
| Interoperability with other system | SaS (WCF framework) | Yes | Yes |
Must be implemented |
| Systematic Prerequisite | - | .net 4.0 | .net 3.5 | - |
| Performance | ||||
| Central Exception Handling | NO | Yes | Yes |
Must be implemented |
| Developer company future support | Most Likely | Likely | Most Likely | - |
| Staff training complexity | Little difficult | Easy | Easy | Easier |
| Interaction languages | C# | All .Net Languages | C# and Inline tools | C# |
| Design workflow in code | - | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Sharepoint Events support | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Must be implemented |
| Design Environment | Web Based | VS Integrated , Support XAML | VS Integrated | - |
| Form Designer | Yes | Share Point | Share Point | - |
| SSL for authentication | NO |
Must be implemented |
Yes | Must be implemented |
| Reporting | Yes | Must be implemented | Yes (+ Designer) | Must be implemented |
