Comment 6 for bug 401094

> Depending on how fast the network is, duplicity will be able to overlap
> its marshaling with the previous file being uploaded. We don't build up
> a queue, so if it takes longer to marshal the files for the next volume,
> say a bunch of small files, then you have dead time in the network.

Right, but he said it maxes out at 300. Asynchronous shouldn't have anything to do with max speed, but rather throughput. emilio, can you clarify if the problem is max speed or throughput?

> As to CPU, IO does not use much, only the marshaling process and
> encryption, and 50% sounds about right in bursts.

emilio has a dual-core, so 50% is really 100% of one core. I meant that since the marshaling isn't threaded, even if asynchronous were turned on, we'd still only use 100% of one core. (Though we'd be using it more often -- i.e. even when uploading something. Another max vs. throughput issue)

So again, unless emilo can clarify about the max/throughput question, I don't think asynchronous is the answer here. We still want both network and CPU maxes to be higher, even though asynchronous would help with overall throughput.