<session_save><![CDATA[files]]></session_save>

I usually use a 2 level cache – basic starting config:

        <cache>
	  <backend>Apc</backend>
	  <prefix>magento</prefix>

	  <slow_backend>Memcached</slow_backend>
	  <fast_backend>Apc</fast_backend>

	  <slow_backend_options>
	    <servers><!-- The code supports using more than 1 server but it seems to hurt performance -->
	      <server>
	        <host><![CDATA[127.0.0.1]]></host>
	        <port><![CDATA[11211]]></port>
	        <persistent><![CDATA[1]]></persistent>
	      </server>
	    </servers>
	    <compression><![CDATA[]]></compression>
	    <cache_dir><![CDATA[]]></cache_dir>
	    <hashed_directory_level><![CDATA[]]></hashed_directory_level>
	    <hashed_directory_umask><![CDATA[]]></hashed_directory_umask>
	    <file_name_prefix><![CDATA[]]></file_name_prefix>
	  </slow_backend_options>

	  <memcached>
	    <servers>
	      <server>
	        <host><![CDATA[127.0.0.1]]></host>
	        <port><![CDATA[11211]]></port>
	        <persistent><![CDATA[1]]></persistent>
	      </server>
	    </servers>
	    <compression><![CDATA[]]></compression>
	    <cache_dir><![CDATA[]]></cache_dir>
	    <hashed_directory_level><![CDATA[]]></hashed_directory_level>
	    <hashed_directory_umask><![CDATA[]]></hashed_directory_umask>
	    <file_name_prefix><![CDATA[]]></file_name_prefix>
	  </memcached>
        </cache>

Even though I see a fairly ordinary site storing 80MB of data in memcache, but only seems to deliver back at < 10kB/s – so the actual difference between that and straight single level APC cache may be minimal, for a fair bit of effort and extra administration.

I still stand by my assertion – irrespective of others belief in the generic file system cache! – that tmpfs makes a fair difference… in fact in back-to-back tests of a well used ( in developmental terms! ) 1.4.1 site on dedicated hardware ( loads of spare mem, cpu power ), that it improved a random product page load by over 20%.

as im facing conflict between 2 modules and always i have to disable one for the other one will display???

Thanks

@Robert and @Kristoff
Do you guys think this is a robust solution ??

If not any ideas ?

Cheers,
Daniel

{
   /* method that changes the sate of manually invoiced orders */

    function manualInvoiceAction(Varien_Event_Observer $event) {

        $order = $event->getEvent()->getInvoice()->getOrder();// get the order
        $payment = $order->getPayment()->getMethodInstance();// retrieve method instance

       // Check to make sure we are only changing the state on orders that use the magebase pxpay payment method and that the state is pending.
        if($payment instanceof MageBase_DpsPaymentExpress_Model_Method_Pxpay && $order->getState() == Mage_Sales_Model_Order::STATE_PENDING_PAYMENT){

             $order->setState(Mage_Sales_Model_Order::STATE_PROCESSING, Mage::getStoreConfig('payment/magebasedpspxpay/order_status'), '');
             $order->setStatus(Mage::getStoreConfig('payment/magebasedpspxpay/order_status'));
            // Optional. sends the customer a notification email uncomment below if you want to use. Should make this check the confi
            // $order->sendNewOrderEmail();
            // $order->setEmailSent(true);
             // $order->save();
        }

    }
}}

We haven’t rolled this live yet as it hasn’t been full tested.

Any ideas?

Thanks

Richard

I’m still Magento beginners. At the moment I learn best because of examples….

Thanks again for you help!

Maik