By design, Airflow needs a centralized server/daemon, whereas snakemake is just a command line tool, like make/cmake. This would become an issue in the HPC environment.
In Airflow the workflow is assumed to be repetitively executed whereas in snakemake it is usually run once (like you will only compile the program when source files change).
Airflow has a queuing system, whereas Snakemake is to be used in conjuncture with other task management systems.
In Snakemake, shell script always feels like a second-order citizen, whereas with Snakemake, it has good support for shell scripting, which enables easy integration with tools made in other programming languages.
By design, Airflow needs a centralized server/daemon, whereas snakemake is just a command line tool, like make/cmake. This would become an issue in the HPC environment.
In Airflow the workflow is assumed to be repetitively executed whereas in snakemake it is usually run once (like you will only compile the program when source files change).
Airflow has a queuing system, whereas Snakemake is to be used in conjuncture with other task management systems.
In Snakemake, shell script always feels like a second-order citizen, whereas with Snakemake, it has good support for shell scripting, which enables easy integration with tools made in other programming languages.