Thanks, I searched for previous reports of this, but I did not see that one. In that thread, Andrew Dunstan suggested
>Maybe a simpler fix would be to rename one set of nodes to "Sort-Workers" or some such.
Is that feasible? Maybe as "Workers (Sort)"?
>We also need to think about whether we can change >this without big backwards-compatibility problems.
As in, due to users relying on this idiosyncratic output and working around parsing issues (ruby, python, and node's built-in parsers all seem to just keep the last entry when keys repeat by default), or because merging the nodes would introduce new entries in the Workers nodes that users may not expect?
