Weird (network?) issue dramatically slows operation selection

[rcoope]

OK I have  super weird one with MasterCAM 2023. We wanted to share a new lathe tool database on a common network file location. I set it up but as soon as we linked to it, selecting an operation got extremely slow. eg you click on Face or Rough or Drill  and it takes 15 seconds to bring up the operation dialog box or chaining window. On our other computers and before this event, these come up instantly.  So we went back to having the database in the regular shared location on the C:\ drive. The problem is, the operation selection is still really slow. We have MasterCAM installed on several computers and this issue only happened on one computer where we tried accessing the tooldb at the network drive. The network location operates perfectly normally otherwise by the way. Has anyone seen this or has any insight? I'm tempted to uninstall 2023 and reinstall it if we can't solve it more elegantly. I feel like there is some user-specific file I need to delete that will be recreated on startup or something. 
Additional note: I just checked and the mill operations are unaffected by this issue, they pop up instantly. 

[David Colin]

Lathe tool database may be very heavy if you are using a lot of 3D tools. Mine is about 300Mbytes (about 100 3Dtools) and on a slow local network it’s not usable.

[rcoope]

48 minutes ago, David Colin said:

Lathe tool database may be very heavy if you are using a lot of 3D tools. Mine is about 300Mbytes (about 100 3Dtools) and on a slow local network it’s not usable.

Ours is 10Mb so far but it works perfectly on two other computers. Also the problem is now not connected to this database, it's slow for all the lathe databases, as though it's still checking for something on the network which is being slow, even though it shouldn't be doing that.  

[Brad St.]

This may be a dumb question but are all the computers on the same network feed (sorry not sure of the right term). Ex. is the one that is slow say on a splitter or hub that has multiple other computers tied to it thus limiting it's bandwidth?

[gcode]

I would try putting a default tool library on the network, link to that and see if you get the same delay.

Another thought is that you have   inadvertently  changed your toolpath operations defaults to the network

and Mastercam is wandering around the network looking for something that isn't there.

That may be why you are seeing a delay when you launch a new operation

[Jake L]

I have a somewhat similar issue. I think the issue for me is the fact that I'm programming at a secondary location over a VPN. This issue occurs when I use the "shared mastercam" folder on one of our companies shared drives. When I create a new drill the tool definition page takes a full minute to load. The weird thing is it's only drills, spot drills, and taps. If I create a new endmill or reamer, no issues, the tool definition screen pops up instantly. I have not noticed any other significant delays. Files take a little extra time to open, but being offsite that's to be expected.

To get around this wait time, I copy the "shared mastercam" folder to my local drive and run from there. If I visit our primary location, I can run on the shared drive no issue. The internet speed of both locations is excellent (300Mbps download/ 30Mbps upload). This is an issue in Mcam 2022 and 2023.

[rcoope]

Thanks for the replies all. We seem to have fixed the problem in that if we start with a brand new part with the tool library on the local drive, everything works fine. I suspect the issue is that when you start a part and add a machine definition and tools etc, it is always looking at those original locations even if when it doesn't seemingly need to. This does not answer the question of why it was so slow in the first place. The network is otherwise perfectly fine in data transfer speeds and indeed all the parts we've worked on for years are on network drives, including some on the same share where this tooldb was. And the tooldb, which is only 12Mb, also  works perfectly when installed on local drives. I do like the theory that it threw off where the operations files were supposed to be but if you look in the configuration it all looks fine. Anyway, all's well that end's well, albeit in an intellectually unsatisfactory manner.