# Upgrade without rebuilding having a good/ready image? **URL:** \ **Category:** Product Support\ **Created:** [November 20, 2025, 3:03pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/upgrade-without-rebuilding-having-a-good-ready-image/389235 "2025-11-20T15:03:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 3
**Author:** ![lejeczek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/edb3f5/32.png) [@lejeczek](https://meta.discourse.org/u/lejeczek)\ **Post date:** [November 20, 2025, 4:07pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/upgrade-without-rebuilding-having-a-good-ready-image/389235/3 "2025-11-20T16:07:15Z")
Downtime is not an issue for me. Two apps I think of, would be - virtually identical - but not the same. Two apps would be different sites, meaning, different dbs, volumes, ports, names… but they would have the same - so to speak - base discourse (+ same plugins, same whatever might critical to that core/base). In ideal world of Discourse - if such does not exit yet - for such scenario, such new image once build first/one time, could be used even with docker tools directly - and DB or anything what would have to be “migrated” to such new image/discourse version, start/boot process of such “secondary” container would - perhaps with help of env vars - decide to check/carry out necessary migrations of dbs. Main advantage - which many must have thought already of - is a single image for both (or many more if some people do that) containers/apps. --- _[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/upgrade-without-rebuilding-having-a-good-ready-image/389235)._