# Possible enhancements to delay node

**URL:** <https://discourse.nodered.org/t/possible-enhancements-to-delay-node/67511>\
**Category:** Feature Requests\
**Created:** [9 September 2022 09:04 UTC](https://discourse.nodered.org/t/possible-enhancements-to-delay-node/67511 "2022-09-09T09:04:12Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Colin](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex026/user_avatar/discourse.nodered.org/colin/32/17040_2.png) [@Colin](https://discourse.nodered.org/u/Colin)\
**Post date:** [9 September 2022 14:06 UTC](https://discourse.nodered.org/t/possible-enhancements-to-delay-node/67511/2 "2022-09-09T14:06:58Z")

</div>

> [@dceejay](#):
>
> if flush and reset are both specified should the timer be honoured for that flushed message

I think yes, the timer should be honoured, though that does mean it is not the same as a flush followed by reset. That means that it is really a Clear rather than a Reset. Intuitively I think that is what a user would expect.

For item 2, I don't like the -ve flush suggestion. It is too difficult to understand.  
For simplicity the 'send last message' suggestion appeals, but on the other hand a max queue depth may be useful for users who want to queue messages, but want a safety net to prevent the queue growing too large in unusual or fault conditions.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.nodered.org/t/possible-enhancements-to-delay-node/67511)._