I completely understand the perception of “No conceivable benefit”. Just simply adding steps to do the exact same thing isn’t particularly helpful!
The problem was that prior to adding those steps, many clinics couldn’t use this report. At all. It would load up for around 30 seconds, then time-out and crash. And so for all of these clinics, too few steps meant a completely unusable report. If you were one of the lucky smaller clinics that never saw this happens, consider yourself lucky!
We trialled many many different optimisations to try and simply make the report “faster”, but the results were consistently the same. Once you reached a certain peak, the report just would no longer work. And even worse, because the report is pulling on so much data, it was making other aspects of Cliniko break as well, such as logging in. This was the mysterious “503” errors that plagued us at the end of last year.
So in the end we rebuilt the report to run as a “background” task - one that can be done over a bit of time without worrying about the database (or anything else) timing out. As a result, the 503 errors have all but disappeared, which has been a massive boon to everyone!
As for your question about practitioners - I know that’s high on a lot of clinic’s wish-lists. Payments aren’t actually assigned to a practitioner at all, and so to create that table on the payment summary for practitioners is a bit of a complex process. We’re working our way towards making it easier to isolate payments per practitioner, but it’s not a something that we’re able to put together quickly. But again, I completely agree with the idea that it’s pretty important for many business!