I hope, you'll be able to test it.
There are still some inconsistencies with price calculations , most probably caused by my code changes, so I'll be cleaning them up in the next week or so, but please test as much as you can all the other areas, so we know what else needs to be changed/improved.
One thing that I am not sure is your usage for Cache_Lite.
Hervet has created his own PersistableObjectHandler and used there Cache_Lite.
The question I have is:
- was it because XOOPS didn't have yet its own "XoopsPersistableObjectHandler" when Hervet was developing Oledrion? Or was it because he wanted to make his PersistableObjectHandler better than our "XoopsPersistableObjectHandler"?
- is Cache_Lite comparable to XOOPS Cache in performance? Or is it better?
In other words: if I replace his PersistableObjectHandler with "XoopsPersistableObjectHandler" and remove Cache_Lite and instead use our standard XOOPS Cache mechanism, will I experience a significant performance drop, or will they be more or less the same?
If they are comparable in performance, then I would probably convert Oledrion to use the "XoopsPersistableObjectHandler", as it would help us keep all the modules consistent.
I've done it in another Hervet's module:
Birthday, i.e. I converted it to "XoopsPersistableObjectHandler", as it helped to get rid of some PEAR errors (if user had already another PEAR installation) but since Birthday is not "transaction-oriented", even if there is a performance drop, it would be probably insignificant.
But Oledrion is a different story, since it is "transaction-oriented", so that's I wanted to ask experts on the forums for their views.