Harness Hub

The directory · side by side

Compare

Line up two to four entries and see where they differ. The link in your address bar shares this exact comparison.

Temporal vs Inngest. Rows marked Differs have different values.

Startup

Temporal

Remove

Startup

Inngest

Remove

TypeStartupStartup
Categories
In one lineDurable execution for long-running agent workflows.Durable functions and workflows for AI agents.
Stage & fundingDiffers$430M total · $300M Series D (Feb 2026) at $5B valuation—
GitHub stars——
License——
Language——
Last push——
Works with——
Built on——
Built on it——
Similar toDiffers
People linked22
Events00
Pros
  • MetadataMature, MIT-licensed durable-execution engine descended from Uber's Cadence, with about 24K GitHub stars and active development.[1][2]
  • DocsEvent history lets a crashed agent resume from its last recorded decision instead of starting over.[1]
  • User reportsPractitioners use it as the main building block for multi-step agents and value its real-time view of running workflows.[1][2]
  • User reportsOne team chose it over Temporal because it is much simpler to operate.[1]
  • User reportsDurable at the step level: builders say failed steps retry from that step rather than from scratch, which helps multi-step LLM pipelines that hit rate limits.[1][2]
  • DocsSelf-hosting has been supported since 1.0: a single server that defaults to SQLite and in-memory Redis, and can scale horizontally with external Postgres and Redis.[1]
  • User reportsA competitor's comparison recommends it for agents deployed on serverless platforms such as Vercel.[1]
Cons
  • Independent testThere is a real learning curve around determinism and where to draw the workflow/activity line, and existing agent loops must be restructured to fit.[1]
  • DocsSelf-hosting means operating several Temporal cluster services, a persistence database and your own workers, and the main hidden cost is engineering time.[1][2]
  • DocsTemporal Cloud bills per action with a monthly minimum, which gets expensive for chatty, LLM-heavy agents.[1][2]
  • Independent testLarge LLM prompts and responses can saturate workflow history, which has size limits, forcing payload codecs that offload to external storage.[1]
  • MetadataThe server is licensed under the SSPL, converting to Apache-2.0 three years after release, so it is source-available rather than OSI open source.[1]
  • DocsEvery step counts as an execution (a run with 5 steps uses 6), and the free tier allows 50k executions, 5 concurrent steps and 24 hours of trace history.[1]
  • DocsThe single-node 'inngest start' mode is marked [Beta], and Inngest does not guarantee support for self-hosted instances.[1]
  • User reportsAt least one user called it 'unfortunately not very reliable'.[1]
  • User reportsThe cloud product sends your workflow data to Inngest, a point a competitor raised.[1]
Best forTeams running long-lived, crash-safe agent workflows that already have platform engineers to operate them.TypeScript and serverless teams that want durable, step-based agent workflows without running Temporal.
Watch out forThe determinism model and history-size limits when moving an existing agent loop onto Temporal.Count steps, not runs, when you price it, and read the SSPL before self-hosting commercially.
Links

Popular comparisons