RPC program high CPU usage on C240 but not C3600

[Brian K. Arnholt]

I have a new rpc program (developed by someone else) that I have been testing on our HP-UX systems. I tested the server-side program on two systems, a C3600 and a C240 running HP-UX 11.00. The client program runs on a Solaris box. The program runs fine on the C3600, however, when I run the same program on the C240, it quickly runs CPU usage up near 100%.

What???s puzzling is it doesn???t matter if I build the rpc program on either the C3600 (running C-complier V3899BA, version 11.02.04) or the C240 (running C-compiler B3899BA, version 11.01.01).

The same executable that was built and runs fine on the C3600 when copied to the C240 it exhibits the high CPU usgae. I have seen compiler-induced memory leaks that have been fixed with compiler upgrades, but this doesn???t appear to be the case, indicating that possibly this is an O/S version related issue.

I have scanned the patch lists and can???t find any ???smoking gun??? patch. Can anyone suggest a solution (patch, or something else) ?

[The C3600 is running the March, 2002 release of HP-UX 11.00, the C240 is running the November, 1999 release of HP-UX 11.00.]z`

[A. Clay Stephenson · Accepted solution]

I strongly suspect that if you install the latest QPK and HWE patches on both boxes your problems will disappear. The release dates of the OS do not matter; both can be updated to completely equivalent levels by the use of Quality Packs/Hardware Enablement Patches (or the old names HWCR/GR (Hardware Critical Release / General Release) patch bundles.

At the very least, you need to do a swlist on the C3600 and note the latest patchsets and install those on the C240.

The fundamental problem is probably a difference in shared libraries or the rpc daemon.

[Steven E. Protter]

Patches is the first place to look.

There could be dependencies on the binary that are missing or have been modified by one of the patches.

what binaryname

on both systems.

You may see some differences. Then take action based on what you see.

Whether or not the patches are the problem(I almost never vote against A. Clay), the box should be patches.

Quality Packs are now available at http://software.hp.com

SEP

[Brian K. Arnholt]

Thanks to both...the Sept, '03 Quality Pak solved the problem. Since I was lazy and simply installed the QPK versus doing a patch fileset comparison, I can't readily pin point where the particular problem was (but as Clay suggested, I assume it was the RPC daemon).

Anyway, it fixed my problem.

Brian