Softwr

Automation Integration · head to head

Flowable vs StarRocks

Flowable logo

Flowable

Automation Integration

Apache 2.0 BPMN, CMMN and DMN engine from the team that originally built Activiti

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
StarRocks logo

StarRocks

Databases

Apache 2.0 MPP analytical database built for joins on open table formats

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Flowable the open source engine is genuinely usable but ships without the modelling studio, work application and admin console, so an open source deployment means building your own user interfaces before anyone can use it.; StarRocks self-hosting is a genuine operations job: frontend and backend node roles, tablet distribution, compaction and materialised view refresh all need an owner, and there is no small-team-friendly single-binary mode.
  • They diverge on capability: Flowable covers BPMN 2.0 engine, StarRocks covers Cost-based optimiser.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Flowable and StarRocks actually diverge.

Attributes where Flowable and StarRocks differ
AttributeFlowableStarRocks
Pricing modelquoteOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsLinux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes, CloudLinux, Docker, Kubernetes
CategoryAutomation IntegrationDatabases

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Flowable

  • BPMN 2.0 engine
  • CMMN case management
  • DMN decision tables
  • Spring Boot integration
  • Modelling studio
  • Task and case application
  • REST APIs
  • History and audit

Only in StarRocks

  • Cost-based optimiser
  • Lakehouse query engine
  • Primary key tables
  • Materialised views
  • Shared-data mode
  • MySQL wire protocol

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Flowable

  • An insurer automating claims handling where each case follows a different path and BPMN alone cannot express itnot StarRocks
  • A bank embedding process orchestration inside an existing Spring Boot estate rather than buying a separate platformnot StarRocks
  • A team leaving Activiti or jBPM that wants the same API family with active commercial maintenancenot StarRocks
  • A regulated organisation needing complete process history and decision table audit trails for supervisorsnot StarRocks

StarRocks

  • Customer-facing analytics where queries join a fact table to several dimensions and must return in well under a secondnot Flowable
  • Querying an Iceberg lakehouse directly without copying data into a proprietary warehouse formatnot Flowable
  • Replacing a ClickHouse deployment that has become unmanageable because every new question needs another denormalised tablenot Flowable
  • Real-time analytics fed by change data capture where rows must be updated in place rather than appendednot Flowable

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Flowable

  • The open source engine is genuinely usable but ships without the modelling studio, work application and admin console, so an open source deployment means building your own user interfaces before anyone can use it.
  • It expects Java engineering capacity; teams looking for a business-user low-code automation tool will find the modelling and deployment cycle far too technical.
  • Enterprise pricing is not published and is quoted per deployment, leaving buyers without a benchmark against Camunda or IBM alternatives.
  • The Activiti fork left three engines with related APIs and overlapping documentation in circulation, and search results routinely return advice for the wrong one.
  • Flowable AG is a small Swiss company relative to its competitors, so the partner network, training market and pool of engineers with production experience are all limited outside Europe.

StarRocks

  • Self-hosting is a genuine operations job: frontend and backend node roles, tablet distribution, compaction and materialised view refresh all need an owner, and there is no small-team-friendly single-binary mode.
  • CelerData is by far the dominant contributor despite Linux Foundation stewardship, so the practical roadmap risk is the same as any single-vendor open source project.
  • It inherits a MySQL-flavoured SQL dialect from its Doris ancestry, so queries written for PostgreSQL, Snowflake or Trino need rewriting rather than porting.
  • Ecosystem support is thinner than ClickHouse or Trino: fewer client libraries, fewer managed hosting options and a much smaller pool of engineers who have run it in production.
  • Memory pressure under concurrent large joins is a common production failure, and the tuning knobs for query memory limits are unforgiving compared with a cloud warehouse that just scales.

Pricing, plan by plan

Flowable

Free
  • Flowable Open SourceFree
    • Apache 2.0 licensed BPMN, CMMN and DMN engines
    • Embeddable Java library or standalone apps
    • No modelling studio or enterprise applications
  • Flowable Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Modelling studio, work application and admin console
    • Connectors, forms and advanced identity management
    • Support with SLA and version maintenance

StarRocks

Free
  • StarRocksFree
    • Apache 2.0 licence
    • Linux Foundation governance
    • No usage or node limits
  • CelerData Cloud$undefined/year
    • Managed StarRocks from the primary contributor
    • BYOC and serverless deployment options
    • Enterprise support and SLAs

Which should you pick?

Choose Flowable if

  • You need bpmn 2.0 engine.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud.
  • You also want cmmn case management.
Flowable review

Choose StarRocks if

  • You need cost-based optimiser.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes.
  • You also want lakehouse query engine.
StarRocks review

Questions people ask

Is Flowable or StarRocks better?
Neither clearly leads. Flowable starts at Free and StarRocks at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Flowable or StarRocks?
Flowable starts at Free and StarRocks at Free.
Does Flowable or StarRocks run on more platforms?
Flowable runs on Linux, Windows, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud. StarRocks runs on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes.
Can I use Flowable for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Flowable best used for?
Flowable is most often used for an insurer automating claims handling where each case follows a different path and bpmn alone cannot express it, a bank embedding process orchestration inside an existing spring boot estate rather than buying a separate platform, a team leaving activiti or jbpm that wants the same api family with active commercial maintenance, a regulated organisation needing complete process history and decision table audit trails for supervisors. Of those, an insurer automating claims handling where each case follows a different path and bpmn alone cannot express it and a bank embedding process orchestration inside an existing spring boot estate rather than buying a separate platform are not what StarRocks is typically brought in for.
What can Flowable do that StarRocks cannot?
Flowable covers BPMN 2.0 engine, CMMN case management, DMN decision tables, Spring Boot integration. StarRocks covers Cost-based optimiser, Lakehouse query engine, Primary key tables, Materialised views.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Flowable: Is Flowable open source?

Yes, the BPMN, CMMN and DMN engines are Apache 2.0. The modelling studio and enterprise applications are commercial.

StarRocks: Is StarRocks open source?

Yes, Apache 2.0, governed under the Linux Foundation since 2023.

Flowable: How does it relate to Activiti and jBPM?

The same core developers built jBPM, then Activiti, then forked Activiti in 2016 to create Flowable.

StarRocks: How does it differ from ClickHouse?

StarRocks is built for joins across a star schema with a cost-based optimiser; ClickHouse is fastest on denormalised single tables.

Flowable: What does Flowable Enterprise cost?

Nothing is published. It is quoted per deployment by the vendor.

StarRocks: Who maintains it?

CelerData, formerly StarRocks Inc, is the dominant contributor and sells the managed service.

Flowable: Why choose it over Camunda?

CMMN case management is a first-class engine, which matters when work is exception-driven rather than a fixed sequence.

StarRocks: Can it query Iceberg tables directly?

Yes, along with Hudi, Delta Lake, Hive and Paimon, with a local cache for repeat queries.

Share

Related pages

More on Flowable

More on StarRocks

Keep looking

Other head to heads