Apache Airflowvsself-hosted-livesync-server
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Apache Airflow | self-hosted-livesync-server | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 84/100 | 45/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 32 in Workflow Automation | #37 of 40 in Database Management |
| GitHub stars | 47 301 | 274 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +344 | — |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 7 | 0 |
| Latest release | providers-ydb/2.6.1 · 13 Oct 2026 | — |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Python | Shell |
Which one should you pick?
Apache Airflow scores 84/100 against 45/100 for self-hosted-livesync-server, so it is the safer default.
Apache Airflow ships more often: 7 stable releases in the past year, against 0 for self-hosted-livesync-server.
If you want the quickest setup, self-hosted-livesync-server is easier to run; Apache Airflow needs more configuration.
Apache Airflow is growing faster right now (+344 stars in 30 days).
Apache Airflow details →self-hosted-livesync-server details →