Direct download to target location

[Guest]

I have 2 drives, my C: drive (main boot drive) has 3 Gigs of free space and
my D: drive (additional storage drive) has 10 Gigs of free space. When
trying to download a 6 Gig file to the D: drive over HTTP using IE 6, I get a
low disk space error on my C: drive without a byte being used on the actual
target drive (D and the download fails.

I understand IE's caching logic for webpage content, but I can't understand
why the file has to be cached first and then copied when I specifically
specify a target path. Why not just download the file directly to the
user-specified location? I've used IE for many years now and I've always
preferred it to the other browsers on the market but I just can't understand
the reasoning behind this download logic.

Is there a way to change this behavior and have IE download to the target
location directly?

Thanks

 

[Noel Paton]

No - but what you can do is relocate the TIF and TEMP folders to a drive
with more space on it.
You don't specify your OS _ so I'll ASSume it's XPSP2....

For the TIF
Internet Options|General| Settings - Move Folder
For the Temp folder -
System Properties|Advanced|Environment Variables - User variables
in both cases define a path to existing folders on a drive with sufficient
space.
You should limit the TIF folder after moving it - the default is 10% of the
drive size, and is way too big on any reasonable-sized drive.

--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read on how to post messages to NG's

 

[Guest]

That's right the os is XPSP2. You see, even if I were to move the temp folder
to the bigger drive (10 Gigs), there is still not enough room to hold 2
copies of the file (one in the temp folder and enough room to copy it to the
same drive when download is done) as it would need 12 Gigs. This seems like a
big limitation requiring the users to have 2X the needed space for
downloading files. My situation might seem like a corner case but I can see
other scenarios where someone would want to download a large file (larger
than their local free space) to a network share with a lot more free space.
What is the reasoning behind this? Why not just a direct download to the
specified location?


Thanks

 

[Noel Paton]

IIRC, it's actually a security restriction - but I don't really know.
What you could do is use a Download Manager - GetRight would do what you
want (and is Shareware) www.getright.com, and gives a number of other
benefits.


--
Noel Paton (MS-MVP 2002-2006, Windows)

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi
http://www.crashfixpc.com/millsrpch.htm

http://tinyurl.com/6oztj

Please read on how to post messages to NG's