Hello, thank you for this work which greatly improves Docker Compose on Unraid.

Please, Could you add the CPU and RAM usage?

Thank you

Edited March 28Mar 28 by jccdu37

Compose Manager Plus 2026.03.28 is still not showing my immich stack. If I want to create a new stack, the window freezes. I even removed the compose.manager folder and installed plugin new. But window freezes, if I want to create a new stack, too. What shall I do to fix this issue?

1 hour ago, mafa1410 said:

Compose Manager Plus 2026.03.28 is still not showing my immich stack. If I want to create a new stack, the window freezes. I even removed the compose.manager folder and installed plugin new. But window freezes, if I want to create a new stack, too. What shall I do to fix this issue?

What version of unraid, and what other plugins do you have.

3 hours ago, jccdu37 said:

Hello, thank you for this work which greatly improves Docker Compose on Unraid.

Please, Could you add the CPU and RAM usage?

Thank you

I would love this, i was just thinking basic/advanced mode need more, advanced should almost be the default view with more added on top. I hope I can just reuse the cpu/mem display from the docker tab.

42 minutes ago, mstrhakr said:

What version of unraid, and what other plugins do you have.

Try uninstall from Plugins tab, then Install from Apps tab.

My stacks are not showing up either, Unraid version 7.2.4, Compose Manager Plus version 2026.03.28.

6 minutes ago, Fam said:

My stacks are not showing up either, Unraid version 7.2.4, Compose Manager Plus version 2026.03.28.

I also had this problem and tried many things including reverting to default settings. What I forgot was that the Compose Project Directory was also back to default.

Instead of /mnt/user/appdata/ where my compose projects are, it was pointing to a folder an the usb drive.

On 3/26/2026 at 7:53 PM, Jamfin said:

I've noticed that the Advanced View only changes the compose side of things, i've lost all advanced metrics in relation to my containers.

Hi @mstrhakr , did you see this by the way? Toggling Advanced View only works on the compose containers and not those in the view above. I am not sure if this is related to FolderView3 or not though.

At least without folderview there is a basic/advanced toggle for each of the unraid and the compose section.

2 minutes ago, Jamfin said:

Hi @mstrhakr , did you see this by the way? Toggling Advanced View only works on the compose containers and not those in the view above. I am not sure if this is related to FolderView3 or not though.

Ah, I will look into this, thanks.

41 minutes ago, Kilrah said:

At least without folderview there is a basic/advanced toggle for each of the unraid and the compose section.

Interesting thanks for the feedback, I will check this out.

Do please try to do a hard refresh, just in case. [CTRL]+[SHIFT]+[R]

Reinstall again the official plugin. It works normal now.

I tried another brower. There it worked.

Then got back to firefox, deleted browser cache and it worked, too.

Thank you all.

Greetings,

thank you for your work.

I just migrated from the old Docker Compose Manager and did notice something with my Immich docker compose installation which I just want to confirm.

Immich uses multiple .yml files for the hardware acceleration extension as well as for the machine learning extension and the main .yml file is then extended to call the values inside the additional files.

With the old Docker Compose Manager the extension of the main .yml did work without issues. After migrating however, it broke and I had to write the values into the main .yml file to get it working again.

I just wanted to confirm if this should work with the multiple .yml files or if this is expected behaviour.

Thank you.

i,

• Backup & Restore - Manual and scheduled backups with selective restore from the UI.

Sorry for my poor English.

Is this a full stack backup or just of these settings?

In my case, it involves four applications, including PostgreSQL with a database, and the backup is only 2 KB even though the database was updated throughout the day.

Thanks

1 hour ago, The_Kief said:

After update to latest version I also lost acces to all my stacks. they don't show up in the Gui anymore (they still start after reboot), and path is correctly set.

6 hours ago, jccdu37 said:

i,

• Backup & Restore - Manual and scheduled backups with selective restore from the UI.

Sorry for my poor English.

Is this a full stack backup or just of these settings?

In my case, it involves four applications, including PostgreSQL with a database, and the backup is only 2 KB even though the database was updated throughout the day.

Thanks

This is a backup of the compose / project files, not the project app data.

14 hours ago, powerbike2 said:

Greetings,

thank you for your work.

I just migrated from the old Docker Compose Manager and did notice something with my Immich docker compose installation which I just want to confirm.

Immich uses multiple .yml files for the hardware acceleration extension as well as for the machine learning extension and the main .yml file is then extended to call the values inside the additional files.

With the old Docker Compose Manager the extension of the main .yml did work without issues. After migrating however, it broke and I had to write the values into the main .yml file to get it working again.

I just wanted to confirm if this should work with the multiple .yml files or if this is expected behaviour.

Thank you.

I have not experienced this as I don't have any stacks setup this way. Could you provide a sanitized version of that setup so I can try it out and make sure it works?

11 minutes ago, mstrhakr said:

This is a backup of the compose / project files, not the project app data.

To be clear, I would use this backup in addition to getting the app data backup plugin. When I get a chance I'll look it up for you.

On 3/28/2026 at 12:49 PM, jccdu37 said:

Hello, thank you for this work which greatly improves Docker Compose on Unraid.

Please, Could you add the CPU and RAM usage?

Thank you

This is available in the latest beta, please try it out!

Hi,

first of all great work, huge improvement over legacy plugin! Do you consider adding support for Git? I'd like to have option to backup (or pull) compose files from Git server.

1 hour ago, bane said:

Hi,

first of all great work, huge improvement over legacy plugin! Do you consider adding support for Git? I'd like to have option to backup (or pull) compose files from Git server.

I like this, especially for the backup/sync. If we have a project level repo how to we deal with individual compose from a separate repo? I know some software like Komodo support individual git based compose files/setups, is there a standard way to do this? Maybe we could force git based in another folder, and allow using git for main project folder as a separate thing? I have to think about it. If anyone has a good idea let me know. I'm interested for sure though.

Having an issue with starting a 3 container compose file of proxmox servers.

The error is: Error response from daemon: error while creating mount source path '/sys/kernel/security': mkdir /sys/kernel/security: operation not permitted

Unraid 7.2.4 with 128GB Ram.

Compose file:

services:

pve-1:

image: ghcr.io/longqt-sea/proxmox-ve

container_name: pve-1

hostname: pve-1

privileged: true

restart: unless-stopped

cgroup: host

ports:

- "2222:22"

- "3128:3128"

- "8006:8006" # First node Web GUI is listening on 8006

networks:

- dual_stack

volumes:

- /sys/fs/cgroup:/sys/fs/cgroup

- /usr/lib/modules:/usr/lib/modules:ro

- /sys/kernel/security:/sys/kernel/security

- ./VM-Backup:/var/lib/vz/dump

- ./ISOs:/var/lib/vz/template/iso # Replace ./ISOs with the path to your ISO folder

pve-2:

image: ghcr.io/longqt-sea/proxmox-ve

container_name: pve-2

hostname: pve-2

privileged: true

restart: unless-stopped

cgroup: host

ports:

- "2223:22"

- "3129:3128"

- "8007:8006" # Second node Web GUI is listening on 8007

networks:

- dual_stack

volumes:

- /sys/fs/cgroup:/sys/fs/cgroup

- /usr/lib/modules:/usr/lib/modules:ro

- /sys/kernel/security:/sys/kernel/security

- ./VM-Backup:/var/lib/vz/dump

- ./ISOs:/var/lib/vz/template/iso # Replace ./ISOs with the path to your ISO folder

pve-3:

image: ghcr.io/longqt-sea/proxmox-ve

container_name: pve-3

hostname: pve-3

privileged: true

restart: unless-stopped

cgroup: host

ports:

- "2224:22"

- "3130:3128"

- "8008:8006" # Third node Web GUI is listening on 8008

networks:

- dual_stack

volumes:

- /sys/fs/cgroup:/sys/fs/cgroup

- /usr/lib/modules:/usr/lib/modules:ro

- /sys/kernel/security:/sys/kernel/security

- ./VM-Backup:/var/lib/vz/dump

- ./ISOs:/var/lib/vz/template/iso # Replace ./ISOs with the path to your ISO folder

networks:

dual_stack:

enable_ipv6: true

driver: bridge

ipam:

config:

- subnet: fd00::/48

1 hour ago, ghstridr said:

Having an issue with starting a 3 container compose file of proxmox servers.

The error is: Error response from daemon: error while creating mount source path '/sys/kernel/security': mkdir /sys/kernel/security: operation not permitted

Unraid 7.2.4 with 128GB Ram.

Compose file:

services:

pve-1:

image: ghcr.io/longqt-sea/proxmox-ve

container_name: pve-1

hostname: pve-1

privileged: true

restart: unless-stopped

cgroup: host

ports:

- "2222:22"

- "3128:3128"

- "8006:8006" # First node Web GUI is listening on 8006

networks:

- dual_stack

volumes:

- /sys/fs/cgroup:/sys/fs/cgroup

- /usr/lib/modules:/usr/lib/modules:ro

- /sys/kernel/security:/sys/kernel/security

- ./VM-Backup:/var/lib/vz/dump

- ./ISOs:/var/lib/vz/template/iso # Replace ./ISOs with the path to your ISO folder

pve-2:

image: ghcr.io/longqt-sea/proxmox-ve

container_name: pve-2

hostname: pve-2

privileged: true

restart: unless-stopped

cgroup: host

ports:

- "2223:22"

- "3129:3128"

- "8007:8006" # Second node Web GUI is listening on 8007

networks:

- dual_stack

volumes:

- /sys/fs/cgroup:/sys/fs/cgroup

- /usr/lib/modules:/usr/lib/modules:ro

- /sys/kernel/security:/sys/kernel/security

- ./VM-Backup:/var/lib/vz/dump

- ./ISOs:/var/lib/vz/template/iso # Replace ./ISOs with the path to your ISO folder

pve-3:

image: ghcr.io/longqt-sea/proxmox-ve

container_name: pve-3

hostname: pve-3

privileged: true

restart: unless-stopped

cgroup: host

ports:

- "2224:22"

- "3130:3128"

- "8008:8006" # Third node Web GUI is listening on 8008

networks:

- dual_stack

volumes:

- /sys/fs/cgroup:/sys/fs/cgroup

- /usr/lib/modules:/usr/lib/modules:ro

- /sys/kernel/security:/sys/kernel/security

- ./VM-Backup:/var/lib/vz/dump

- ./ISOs:/var/lib/vz/template/iso # Replace ./ISOs with the path to your ISO folder

networks:

dual_stack:

enable_ipv6: true

driver: bridge

ipam:

config:

- subnet: fd00::/48

This seems like a compose file issue and not a Compose Manager Plus issue. Does this work from the command line, if you run compose up -d from the folder with the compose file?

Edited March 31Mar 31 by mstrhakr

16 hours ago, mstrhakr said:

I like this, especially for the backup/sync. If we have a project level repo how to we deal with individual compose from a separate repo? I know some software like Komodo support individual git based compose files/setups, is there a standard way to do this? Maybe we could force git based in another folder, and allow using git for main project folder as a separate thing? I have to think about it. If anyone has a good idea let me know. I'm interested for sure though.

Let me start off with why I am not convinced this is a good idea. One of the big use cases people want this for is that some projects host complete compose stacks on github with the idea that you would just clone the repo and run compose up in it. Putting aside the dangers of running a stack off the internet without understanding it, this conflicts with the way the original compose manager stored project files. The ability to specify a project not in the main folder was a step in the direction of supporting this feature, but a further complication was the diversity of structure of these type of projects. Many of the projects hosted this way do so because they are quite complicated with multiple linked compose files, which makes the parsing for building the override file for applying labels even more complicated. In the end to keep the plugin simple and avoid support requests and for complex compose stacks that stretch my understanding of compose I chose to only explicitly support a simple project layout.

The above said maybe you could do something with git submodules to support for nesting git repos in a git based project folder.

10 minutes ago, primeval_god said:

Let me start off with why I am not convinced this is a good idea. One of the big use cases people want this for is that some projects host complete compose stacks on github with the idea that you would just clone the repo and run compose up in it. Putting aside the dangers of running a stack off the internet without understanding it, this conflicts with the way the original compose manager stored project files. The ability to specify a project not in the main folder was a step in the direction of supporting this feature, but a further complication was the diversity of structure of these type of projects. Many of the projects hosted this way do so because they are quite complicated with multiple linked compose files, which makes the parsing for building the override file for applying labels even more complicated. In the end to keep the plugin simple and avoid support requests and for complex compose stacks that stretch my understanding of compose I chose to only explicitly support a simple project layout.

The above said maybe you could do something with git submodules to support for nesting git repos in a git based project folder.

Yea, i think I agree that it makes more sense to attempt to support individual git based stacks instead of using git for backup/restore of the projects folder. We have a backup feature already do adding git into the mix, while it would be nice for some, would be too much imo. Keeping this plugin simple is a goal for me, specifically keeping it inline with what unraid native would do if they were building this. That means no wild features and nothing that breaks expected behaviors. If the goal is for unraid to integrate this eventually, i need to build it in a way they CAN integrate it someday.

So yea, I think I agree that backup/restore via git doesn't work here and git based stacks is a more important feature.

I had a quick question i just updated to the new manager plus,
But how do i delete old stacks that i dont need anymore i cant find that option