Hello again,
>> Obviously this would work. I did not think the special case was worth the
>> extra argument. This one has some oddity too, because the second argument is
>> ignored depending on the third. Do as you feel.
>
> Actually my question was whether keeping the original start_time was the
> intended design.
Sorry I misunderstood the question.
The answer is essentially yes, the field is needed for the "aggregated"
mode where this specific behavior is used.
However, after some look at the code I think that it is possible to do
without.
I also spotted an small issue under low tps where the last aggregation was
not shown.
With the attached version these problems have been removed, no conditional
initialization. There is also a small diff with the version you sent.
--
Fabien.