Hello Heikki,
> This now begs the question:
>
> In --rate mode, shouldn't the reported transaction latency also be calculated
> from the *scheduled* start time, not the time the transaction actually
> started? Otherwise we're using two different definitions of "latency", one
> for the purpose of the limit, and another for reporting.
It could. Find a small patch **on top of v5** which does that. I've tried
to update the documentation accordingly as well.
Note that the information is already there as the average lag time is
reported, ISTM that:
avg latency2 ~ avg lag + avg latency1
so it is just a matter of choice, both are ok somehow. I would be fine
with both.
--
Fabien.