I think MS just did us (and themselves) a disservice.

[Richard Sharpe]

At 04:44 PM 1/10/01 -0600, Christopher R. Hertel wrote:
>:
>
>> This is suboptimal, though, because if server, and user and workgroup are
>> the same, we should be able to put the new share request down the same TCP
>> connection, but if user is different, then we will automatically create a
>> new connection.
>
>In the case where Samba is the server, would reusing the existing
>connection reduce the number of spawned smbd daemons?
>
>In any case, it sounds like a worth-while optimization.

I looked again, and it is going to take some work to get this optimization
done.  That is, we don't get it for free, but it would be worth it later.

Basically, the current libsmb stuff does not make this optimization as far
as I can see currently.

The current code thinks of server, share, user as one entity to which a TCP
connection is attached.

Really, it should be all shares that point have the same server and user
should point to the same connection structure ... 

Unfortunately, it will take some work to change the code :-(

At the moment, I would prefer to spend the time shaking my code out, and
deal with this issue, and issues like getting the code to work in
multi-interface cases, later.

>Chris -)-----
>
>-- 
>Christopher R. Hertel -)-----                   University of Minnesota
>crh at nts.umn.edu              Networking and Telecommunications Services
>
>    Ideals are like stars; you will not succeed in touching them
>    with your hands...you choose them as your guides, and following
>    them you will reach your destiny.  --Carl Schultz
>
>

Regards
-------
Richard Sharpe, sharpe at ns.aus.com
Samba (Team member, www.samba.org), Ethereal (Team member, www.zing.org)
Contributing author, SAMS Teach Yourself Samba in 24 Hours
Author, Special Edition, Using Samba