What does Temporal cost when self-hosted?
Quick Answer: Self-hosted Temporal is free under the MIT license — the only cost is the infrastructure to run Temporal Server, its persistence layer (PostgreSQL or Cassandra), and optional Elasticsearch for advanced visibility. As of July 2026, a small production deployment on AWS typically costs about $480-$790/month (server nodes, managed Postgres, optional Elasticsearch, and workers). The managed alternative, Temporal Cloud, starts at the Essentials plan from $100/month (1 million Actions, billed as the greater of $100 or 5% of usage) and is usage-priced on Actions above that — self-hosting wins on cost mainly at high, steady volume where you already run the infrastructure.
Self-Hosted Temporal Licensing
Temporal Server and the official SDKs (Go, Java, TypeScript, Python, PHP, .NET) are released under the MIT license. There is no license fee for running Temporal in production, including in commercial SaaS products. The cost is entirely infrastructure and operations.
Infrastructure cost drivers (AWS, July 2026)
- Temporal Server cluster: stateless; production usually runs 3+ nodes for HA. Three m6i.xlarge instances run roughly $200/month (1-year reserved) to $330/month on-demand.
- Persistence layer: PostgreSQL or Cassandra. An RDS PostgreSQL db.m6g.large with 200 GB is ~$180/month; a three-node Cassandra cluster for high write throughput is ~$900/month.
- Elasticsearch (optional): recommended for advanced visibility queries; a three-node OpenSearch cluster starts ~$180/month.
- Workers: your application servers running workflows/activities — a small deployment is ~$100/month combined.
Typical small deployment total
| Component | Monthly (AWS, July 2026) |
|---|---|
| Temporal Server (3 nodes) | $200-$330 |
| PostgreSQL (db.m6g.large, 200 GB) | $180 |
| Elasticsearch (3× t3.medium.search) | $180 |
| Workers (2 instances) | $100 |
| Total | $660-$790/month |
Without Elasticsearch (standard visibility only), the total falls to roughly $480-$610/month.
Comparison with Temporal Cloud
The managed Temporal Cloud starts at the Essentials plan from $100/month (billed as the greater of $100 or 5% of usage; includes 1 million Actions, 1 GB active / 40 GB retained storage, 99.9% SLA), with Business from $500/month and usage priced on Actions (~$50/million) above the bundle. Cloud includes operational responsibilities self-hosters must handle themselves — cluster upgrades, persistence scaling, Elasticsearch lifecycle, SRE on-call, multi-region replication, and SOC 2 posture.
When self-hosting makes sense
Self-hosting is economical when the team already runs Kubernetes and has SRE capacity, or at high, steady volume where Cloud's per-Action pricing exceeds infrastructure cost. Teams processing hundreds of millions of Actions per month frequently find self-hosted Temporal cheaper even after SRE time. Smaller teams usually find the managed Essentials plan worth the premium until volume justifies dedicated operational investment.
Editor's Note: The honest version of self-hosted-versus-Cloud for Temporal is an SRE question, not a license one — the license is free (MIT), but a production cluster (server nodes, Postgres or Cassandra, optional Elasticsearch, monitoring, upgrades, on-call) is real, ongoing work. Re-checked July 2026: a small self-hosted deployment runs about $480-$790/month on AWS, while Temporal Cloud now starts at Essentials $100/month (1M Actions) — so below serious volume the managed plan is usually cheaper than the SRE time self-hosting consumes; self-hosting wins at high, steady Action volume where you already operate the infrastructure. — Rafal Fila, ShadowGen
Related Questions
Related Tools
Temporal Workflows
Build applications that never lose state, even when everything else fails.
Workflow AutomationApache Airflow
Programmatic authoring, scheduling, and monitoring of data workflows
ETL & Data PipelinesActivepieces
No-code workflow automation with self-hosting and AI-powered features
Workflow AutomationAutomatisch
Open-source Zapier alternative
Workflow AutomationRelated Rankings
Best Human-in-the-Loop Automation Platforms 2026
Eight platforms are ranked here on a single mechanism: how a person enters an automated path, and what the system can prove afterward about the decision they made. Moxo scores 7.7 and ranks first; Camunda 8 scores 7.2, Microsoft Power Automate 7.1, Pega 6.9, n8n 6.7, Zapier 5.9, Kissflow 5.8 and ServiceNow 4.8, scored 22 September 2026 on the five weighted criteria. Those criteria cover the step type, the approver's account or licence, the routes available on a rejection, the audit record, and the meter that charges for the decision, and none of them can tell a review from a rubber stamp, so the methodology adds a check readers can run on any product in a few minutes: whether the decision record tells a considered approval from an instant one. Every figure was read from a vendor-owned surface and carries its own date.
Best Automation Platforms for AI Orchestration 2026
This ranking answers one question: how many real business applications can an AI agent act on out of the box? It evaluates nine platforms as of August 2026 on the reach they give an agent, not on the workflow logic they can express. That boundary is deliberate, because two neighbouring pages on this site answer different questions. Best Process Orchestration Platforms 2026 scores multi-step process control, error handling and state management. Best AI Agent Platforms 2026 scores building and hosting the agent itself. This page scores the layer between them: the connective tissue that lets an agent already built elsewhere reach the applications a business actually runs on. A platform that leads one of those pages can place low here, and two of them do. Scores derive from application and action catalogue counts, the exposure model each platform uses to publish those catalogues to an agent, setup effort, failure handling and cost per agent action. Every figure was retrieved from a vendor-owned surface on 11 August 2026 unless an earlier date is stated against it.
Dive Deeper
Moxo vs Gumloop in 2026: Texting the Client, or Building the Agent
Gumloop (founded 2023) builds AI agents a company's own staff run; Moxo, whose predecessor Moxtra was co-founded in 2012, runs processes that wait on people outside the company. Gumloop wins three rounds to two: the way in, per-tool gating and a priced overage. Moxo wins on texting a client a step and on what that client can be asked to do. Vendor pages and docs were read on 28 September 2026.
Moxo vs Relay.app in 2026: Where Relay's Approval Workflows Can Go Next
Relay.app, founded in 2021, shut down in September 2026 and deleted every account, workflow and run history; Moxo, whose predecessor Moxtra was co-founded in 2012, is one destination for its human-in-the-loop users. Relay.app takes two rounds, Moxo one, and vendor risk is a draw. The page maps which Relay steps Moxo replaces, on which plan, and what the shutdown teaches about exports, from sources read 28 September 2026.
Moxo vs Workato in 2026: The Integration Estate, or the Approval Inside It
Workato, founded in 2013, is an enterprise integration platform whose Workflow apps add human tasks to recipes; Moxo, whose predecessor Moxtra was co-founded in 2012, ships the human step itself. Workato wins three rounds to two: connector reach, change control and the way in. Moxo wins the human step and retries. Vendor pages and docs were read on 28 September 2026.