diff --git a/backend/handlers/payments/locks.go b/backend/handlers/payments/locks.go
index de3128e..4dcabd5 100644
--- a/backend/handlers/payments/locks.go
+++ b/backend/handlers/payments/locks.go
@@ -78,6 +78,14 @@ func acquireAdvisoryXactLockBlocking(ctx context.Context, tx pgx.Tx, key string)
 // to a bigint exactly like the blocking `pg_advisory_lock(hashtext($1))` calls
 // it replaces — the two acquire the same locks.
 func tryAdvisoryLock(ctx context.Context, q queryRower, key, fn string) (bool, error) {
+	// ONE reusable timer for the whole retry loop instead of time.After per
+	// attempt: a contended lock spins ~30 times, and allocating a fresh timer
+	// (with its own goroutine) on every attempt is wasteful. The timer is
+	// Stop+drained before each Reset so a previously-fired tick can never make
+	// the next wait return early (missed-tick semantics). Timing is preserved:
+	// 100ms between attempts, ~3s total bound.
+	timer := time.NewTimer(advisoryLockRetryDelay)
+	defer timer.Stop()
 	for attempt := 0; attempt < advisoryLockAttempts; attempt++ { // ~3s total
 		var acquired bool
 		if err := q.QueryRow(ctx, `SELECT `+fn+`(hashtext($1))`, key).Scan(&acquired); err != nil {
@@ -86,8 +94,15 @@ func tryAdvisoryLock(ctx context.Context, q queryRower, key, fn string) (bool, e
 		if acquired {
 			return true, nil
 		}
+		if !timer.Stop() {
+			select {
+			case <-timer.C:
+			default:
+			}
+		}
+		timer.Reset(advisoryLockRetryDelay)
 		select {
-		case <-time.After(advisoryLockRetryDelay):
+		case <-timer.C:
 		case <-ctx.Done():
 			return false, ctx.Err()
 		}
diff --git a/backend/handlers/payments/sweep.go b/backend/handlers/payments/sweep.go
index 61f2861..3465c01 100644
--- a/backend/handlers/payments/sweep.go
+++ b/backend/handlers/payments/sweep.go
@@ -59,11 +59,17 @@ func SweepStalePendingPayments(ctx context.Context) (int, error) {
 	if total > 0 {
 		log.Printf("[SWEEP] Resolved %d stale pending payments (%d payments, %d till sales) older than %s — late retries will be rejected, preventing a second Square charge; %d reconciled to completed against Square (%d payments, %d till sales)", total, payCount, tillCount, stalePendingPaymentAge, payCompleted+tillCompleted, payCompleted, tillCompleted)
 	}
+	// Routine sweep bookkeeping, not an incident: failing stale pending rows is
+	// the sweep's DESIGNED behaviour. A row swept to failed may still have been
+	// charged at Square with a lost response, so note it at WARN level for an
+	// admin doing a periodic money reconciliation — but this fires on every
+	// normal run and must not be elevated to CRITICAL (which is reserved for
+	// genuinely unrecoverable post-charge branches).
 	if payCount > 0 {
-		log.Printf("CRITICAL: %d pending payments swept to failed may have been charged at Square with a lost response — manual reconciliation required before refunding/charging", payCount-payCompleted)
+		log.Printf("[SWEEP] WARN: %d pending payments marked failed may have been charged at Square with a lost response — verify before refunding/charging", payCount-payCompleted)
 	}
 	if tillCount > 0 {
-		log.Printf("CRITICAL: %d pending till sales swept to failed may have been charged at Square with a lost response — manual reconciliation required", tillCount-tillCompleted)
+		log.Printf("[SWEEP] WARN: %d pending till sales marked failed may have been charged at Square with a lost response", tillCount-tillCompleted)
 	}
 	return total, nil
 }