> Wouldn't it be more interesting to make the app's get() method
> asynchronous as well, so that each chunk actually gets passed
> separately?

That's a good point. I'll try to look into it.

> Or maybe split it up into two benchmarks, one that exercises the
> asynchronous client (as your current code does) and one that shifts more 
> work to the server side? Not sure if it's worth it, but might be worth
> trying. I think it would cover two different use cases that way.

You still need a client to exercise the server, and a server to exercise the client, so I'm not sure how to separate them (short of using an external utility, which would add dependencies).