On Tue, 9 Dec 2014, Nagel, Bill wrote:

>> I would like to hear from Bill and Steve if they think it would be doable
>> to change the SMB code to use the existing 'buffer' and 'uploadbuffer'
>> memory areas instead of the custom ones? It would solve these issues and
>> avoid more quirks and funny work-arounds.
>
> The buffers are currently part of the connection.

That's even worse. A single easy handle can do many connections and there's no
point in having idle transfer buffers in each of them!

> Can a connection be kept alive without a valid session?

Yes, connections are kept alive separate from the easy handle. Which itself
leads to another nit of mine as it seems SMB doesn't do persistant
connections? If you get the same file twice in the same curl command line, are
they done over the same TCP connection?

> Also, will BUFSIZE always be <= 64K?

Well, we could have a check that made sure we never used more than 64K if it
would be larger, but it is 16K now (since forever) and it seems unlikely that
we would make it larger by default any time soon. I do suspect that we at some
point in the future will make it allocated on demand and then it could
probably become larger than 16K when deemed clever (SFTP for example would
benefit a lot from something like that).

-- 
  / daniel.haxx.se
-------------------------------------------------------------------
List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library
Etiquette:  http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html