Issue 73214 - soffice.bin consuming 100% cpu
Summary: soffice.bin consuming 100% cpu
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE of issue 72767
Alias: None
Product: General
Classification: Code
Component: code (show other issues)
Version: OOo 2.1
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 Trivial (vote)
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: thorsten.martens
QA Contact: issues@framework
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2007-01-06 22:44 UTC by adrianjball
Modified: 2007-01-07 19:31 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

See Also:
Issue Type: DEFECT
Latest Confirmation in: ---
Developer Difficulty: ---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this issue.
Description adrianjball 2007-01-06 22:44:49 UTC 
If I have the quickstarter loaded, then after some time running (maybe 24hrs,
but it seems randon) soffice.bin starts to consume 100% of cpu, and Task Manager
shows it as using 47Mb of memory. This is without actually running any OO app,
other than the quickstarter.
I tried downgrading to 2.0.4, with which I had never seen this issue, but the
problem didn't go away. I have not installed any other s/w recently, but AntiVir
does do regular updates.
If I don't load the quickstarter I don't see the problem, although I have not
left an OO app running for long enough to be really sure about this point.
If I exit the quickstarter, then kill soffice.bin in task manager, the computer
returns to normal cpu usage. There are no error messages or crash reports generated.
Comment 1 kpalagin 2007-01-07 09:29:49 UTC 
adrianjball,
I think your problem is caused by some corruption in user profile. 
I suggest renaming "D:\Documents and Settings\USERNAME\Application 
Data\OpenOffice.org2\user" to something else (with quickstarter closed). OO 
will create new user profile and you can leave QS running for a day or two. 

If your problem is resolved I suggest zipping renamed user profile and 
attaching it to your issue.
Comment 2 aziem 2007-01-07 19:31:04 UTC 
This looks like issue 72767

*** This issue has been marked as a duplicate of 72767 ***
Comment 3 aziem 2007-01-07 19:31:40 UTC 
Closing duplicate issue.  Please follow up at issue 72767.