# ARM Support
**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/arm-support/353978
**Category:** Self-hosting
**Tags:** arm
**Created:** [February 23, 2025, 5:39pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/arm-support/353978 "2025-02-23T17:39:37Z")
**Posts on this page:** 6
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Timelord](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Timelord)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2025, 5:39pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/arm-support/353978/1 "2025-02-23T17:39:37Z")
Afternoon. I don’t see any recent discussions on this, so, asking for a “2025” answer.
Is Discourse supported on an ARM based CPU?
---
### Author:  [@merefield](https://meta.discourse.org/u/merefield)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2025, 5:43pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/arm-support/353978/2 "2025-02-23T17:43:30Z")
See #raspberry-pi, and #arm yes it is supported.
---
### Author:  [@Timelord](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Timelord)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2025, 5:44pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/arm-support/353978/3 "2025-02-23T17:44:54Z")
Ahh! Thank you.
To confirm, not just PI, but any box running an ARM processor?
---
### Author:  [@merefield](https://meta.discourse.org/u/merefield)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2025, 5:47pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/arm-support/353978/4 "2025-02-23T17:47:03Z")
Shall defer to a member of the team here:
> [@ARM64 Production Level Reliability](https://meta.discourse.org/t/arm64-production-level-reliability/269246/3):
>
> While we use ARM for PostgreSQL and Redis production hosting, and we have made the Ruby app ARM64 compatible since [Discourse on a Raspberry Pi | Blog](https://meta.discourse.org/t/discourse-on-a-raspberry-pi-blog/211357), we don’t host production traffic from our hosting in ARM yet. That said, as long as you can safely store database backups off-site and monitor the website for error/response times reliably, it should be safe to give ARM in production traffic.
---
### Author:  [@Canapin](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Canapin)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2025, 5:52pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/arm-support/353978/5 "2025-02-23T17:52:23Z")
I’ve had a few instances on ARM servers (at Hetzner) for years and everything works as expected.
But be aware of this:
> [@Mail-receiver lacks an official ARM-compatible image](https://meta.discourse.org/t/mail-receiver-lacks-an-official-arm-compatible-image/352154):
>
> Continuing the discussion from [Does the mail-receiver work with arm?](https://meta.discourse.org/t/does-the-mail-receiver-work-with-arm/283908/10): It has been mentioned a couple of times on meta, but I guess it’s better if it has its own #feature request topic. Discourse works great on ARM servers. I never came across any issue. Unfortunately, running it on this architecture prevents you from using the [official mail-receiver image](https://meta.discourse.org/t/configure-direct-delivery-incoming-email-for-self-hosted-sites-with-mail-receiver/49487). From a technical perspective, I know absolutely nothing and I (confidently) rely on what Matt said in the linked topic:
---
### Author:  [@Ed\_S](https://meta.discourse.org/u/Ed_S)
#### Post date: [February 23, 2025, 6:40pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/arm-support/353978/6 "2025-02-23T18:40:02Z")
There’s also a difference, I think, in how ARM is pulled from the repo. I don’t fully understand:
> [@Launcher pulls an update on ‘enter app’](https://meta.discourse.org/t/launcher-pulls-an-update-on-enter-app/313051/3):
>
> … on Intel the script checks to see if a new image is available, but on ARM it will always pull. The reason given is that ARM always uses a fixed tag. For example, today, we see in the launcher script two possibilities:
> `image="discourse/base:2.0.20240825-0027"`
> or
> `image="discourse/base:aarch64"`
> and as you see, one of those is maintained carefully as new images are approved, and the other is left to the position of the tag.