yeah indeed - not trying to complain about it or anything. Just saying some guidance could be added for suggested use case(s). I could be wrong on this, but seems like WAL would be good to have for something that has out-of-sequence inserts, but if you have purely sequential inserts you'd see little benefit, correct? One other area surrounding WAL that isn't clear to me: say you have multiple applications pushing inserts into Quest, but they're for different partitions (so for example, if I have a table partitioned by date and have 3 different connections pushing 3 different dates at the same time in a historical data load). Would WAL benefit a scenario like that, as would those count as "out of sequence" even though they're sequential per partition but "out of sequence" in aggregate if you count all three partitions ingesting at the same time?