On Tue, 10 Jan 2023 00:17:11 +0900, Akira Yokosawa wrote: > On Mon, 9 Jan 2023 15:14:46 +0100, Martin Liška wrote: >> Hi. >> >> I can confirm the regression, I bisected Sphinx revision that caused that >> and filled an upstream issues: >> https://github.com/sphinx-doc/sphinx/issues/11116 > > Thank you Martin for looking into this! Thanks to Martin's inputs on the github issue, Sphinx 6.1.3 has released and the issue is resolved for parallel builds. However, for non-parallel builds, the memory hog still remains. Again, this is a table comparing 5.3.0, 6.1.2, and 6.1.3. ====== =================================== =============================== elapsed time maxresident ----------------------------------- ------------------------------- Sphinx -j1 -j2 -j4 -j6 -j1 -j2 -j4 -j6 ====== ======== ======== ======== ======== ======= ======= ======= ======= 6.1.3 15:03.83 11:31.99 9:35.15 8:49.01 2949056 1059516 978232 967400 6.1.2 15:11.74 18:06.89 16:39.93 OOM 2961524 5548344 5255372 -- 5.3.0 14:13.04 10:16.81 8:22.37 8:09.74 711532 937660 846016 800340 ====== =================================== =============================== Note: - The -j1 run needs an explicit option given to sphinx-build: make SPHINXOPTS="-q -j1" htmldocs I naively assumed that the memory hog would be resolved all together, but that's not the case. Martin, could you report the remaining issue to upstream Sphinx? Thanks, Akira
