REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION RELEASES:
To request your PR to be included in production software, please add the corresponding labels called "async-" to your PR. Add the labels directly (if you have the permissions) or add a comment of the form (note that labels are separated by a ",")

+async-label <label1>, <label2>, !<label3> ...

This will add <label1> and <label2> and removes <label3>.

The following labels are available
async-2023-pbpb-apass4
async-2023-pp-apass4
async-2024-pp-apass1
async-2022-pp-apass7
async-2024-pp-cpass0
async-2024-PbPb-apass1
async-2024-ppRef-apass1
async-2024-PbPb-apass2
async-2023-PbPb-apass5

@ktf could you have a look please?

How about using it to scale the oldest possible timeframe, rather than completely disable it? I worry that by just disabling it, things could accidentally accumulate.

How about using it to scale the oldest possible timeframe, rather than completely disable it? I worry that by just disabling it, things could accidentally accumulate.

Hmm, assuming that timeslices are a consecutive sequence, this could be done. However, we would have to automatically tune the scaling factor to accordingly to the number of EPNs, which is doable I guess, just more plumbing to do.

This being said, in the case of QC, I don't expect things to accumulate due to poor synchronization. If that happens, maybe it's better that things breaks and we see it, rather than it going unnoticed... I am open for counterarguments though.

Ok, let's start with this and then we see.