Inngest vs Temporal
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted automation & workflows options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Inngest
Event-driven workflow and background job platform
VS
Temporal
Durable execution platform for reliable distributed workflows
| Feature | Inngest | Temporal |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Automation & Workflows | Automation & Workflows |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | docker, kubernetes, helm |
| GitHub stars | ★ 5,701 | ★ 22,173 |
| First released | 2021 | 2019 |
| Replaces | Zapier, AWS Step Functions | AWS Step Functions, Azure Logic Apps |
Why pick each one
Choose Temporal if…
- Extremely reliable for long workflows
- Strong multi-language support
Frequently asked questions
Is Inngest or Temporal better?
Neither is universally better. Temporal has the larger community, while Inngest is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Inngest and Temporal free and open-source?
Yes. Inngest is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Temporal under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Inngest and Temporal with Docker?
Inngest: yes. Temporal: yes.