WFE/WFS Feature List
Feature comparison of WorkflowEngine and WorkflowServer, detailing their capabilities and integrations. Key aspects include main purpose, operating systems supported, and database compatibility. The sheet highlights features such as graphical designer availability, security systems, and API types. Additional details cover Docker support, admin panel presence, and demo links for both platforms. It also lists specific features like multi-server scalability and external code calling capabilities.
Content article
The WFE/WFS Feature List compares two systems: Workflow Engine (WFE) and Workflow Server (WFS), detailing their functionalities and capabilities.
Workflow Engine is an embedded component designed for full integration into .NET Framework or .NET Core projects, while Workflow Server operates as a stand-alone application featuring an admin panel and an integration HTTP API, tailored for microservices-based architecture. Both systems are compatible with Windows, Linux, and MacOS operating systems. In terms of databases, Workflow Engine supports MS SQL Server, MongoDB, Oracle, MySQL, PostgreSQL, and Redis, whereas Workflow Server includes MS SQL Server, PostgreSQL, Oracle, MySQL, and MongoDB.
The graphical and visual designer is available in both systems, utilizing HTML5 technology. However, their security systems differ; Workflow Engine lacks its own security framework but offers integration with external security systems through the IWorkflowRuleProvider interface. In contrast, Workflow Server does not have an inherent security system either, but it allows for identity management through an identity ID linked to user actions and provides a callback API for implementing rules and permissions. Both systems allow for login credentials and access tokens to secure their respective admin panels and APIs.
When it comes to API capabilities, Workflow Engine provides a C# API, while Workflow Server offers an HTTP/REST API that includes a WorkflowAPI for managing workflows and a CallbackAPI for executing actions, rules, and conditions. Docker support is present in both systems, with Workflow Engine being able to be included in the application container, while Workflow Server can also be utilized in a Docker environment.
The admin panel is absent in Workflow Engine but is a feature of Workflow Server. Both systems utilize XML for file formats, and demos are available for Workflow Engine at https://workflowengine.io/demo/designer/ and for Workflow Server at https://forms.workflowserver.io/ and https://demo.workflowserver.io/.
In terms of features, both Workflow Engine and Workflow Server support regular and parallel processes, as well as multi-server and horizontal scalability, but only in their Ultimate versions. Workflow Server excels with features like forms and business entities, which Workflow Engine does not offer. Both systems support multi-tenancy, calling external code, expressions, business rules, and allow for code writing in the designer with IntelliSense. They also share capabilities for scheme updating, workflow scheme generation in code, commands, timers, localization, user parameters, and logging, with Workflow Engine providing state change logs in the WorkflowTransitionHistory table.
Templates, HTTP(s) requests, email sending, file operations, SMS, Slack, and Telegram integrations are supported by both systems. Advanced process monitoring and APIs for starting and stopping processes are also features of both. Offline mode for process execution is anticipated in future versions, with Workflow Engine targeting version 5.2 and Workflow Server aiming for version 3.1. Additionally, a library of typical processes is available in both systems.
However, there are some limitations; Workflow Engine does not currently support synchronization with Google Sheets, Elastic Cloud, or data export to Excel, whereas these features are expected in Workflow Server's upcoming version 3.0.
Regarding the workflow designer, both systems provide annotations and custom fields, customization options, and custom designer elements. Future enhancements like heat maps, BPMN elements, and CMMN elements are anticipated in both systems.
Integration capabilities vary, with Workflow Engine requiring a web server for custom web page processing, while Workflow Server can integrate via iFrame or JavaScript injection. Both systems support ASP.NET MVC, ASP.NET Core MVC, ASP.NET WebForms, and ASP Classic, with Workflow Engine being compatible with Core through a WebBrowser component, while Workflow Server offers HTTP API support for all these frameworks. Notably, Workflow Engine does not provide a PHP solution, whereas Workflow Server does, also via HTTP API.