Pasting Copying sloooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwww

I’d also test copy pasting with or without the outliner maximized.

I find that copy/pasting or other functions like this, especially with a bunch of nested groups, can be significantly slower when the outliner is open.

Oh hell yea, Outliner is a performance killer.
I have it on a separate tray and only enable it when I need to and then turn it back off asap.

Again its got to be something to do with the way SU updates/repopulated the internal db/structure of the open file, a combination of it doing it AND displaying the results simultaniously. Maybe Pasting would be quicker if the materials pallet was also closed/off too.

Looks left/Looks right <whisper> maybe having more than 1 thread might be benificail here </whisper>

I get the same < 5 second for both pastes, and that was pasting into the biggest model I had on my drive at the moment.

But, I don’t have a big material collection. It may be that it’s either the size of your component collection, or your material collection, and I don’t have a collection in either case. I can try to create collections and see if things get slow for me.

1 Like

Wow, irrespective of the model being mapped or not that’s quick, you’re using a Mac aren’t you? I wonder if that makes the diffrence.

It seems to matter. I tried my work PC, and the non-textured one pasted in 2 seconds, the textured one was 16 seconds. I will try to get other people here to do the test.

1 Like

I tried the test on my Windoze box. The times for each were about the same and in a time frame that is about normal for my rig.
There were strange results:
The vase on the right had the same flowers after the paste but the vase itself did not survive the trip. I attempted to copy just the vase but it had the same result, parts of it were missing.
Velly interlesting.

Weird, that model hasn’t ever given me probs … other than being big.
All I did to produce the file was copy and paste the textured one into a new file, delete all its mats and then paste again to get the 2nd copy (with mats).

From memory it was painted with a transparent material, so it appeared to disappear.

I ran your test again on my ‘New to me’ Win 10 machine, old win 8 computer but fresh upgrade to win 10, and the times were 3.5 and 4.5 respectively.

I’m beginning to think that the HD/SSD in a system as a lot to do with copy/paste.
Mac’s have comparatively fast SSD’s and I know for a fact that my SSD is on the lower end of performance.
It would certainly explain the big differences in times we’re seeing.

Neither of mine are SSD.

Well that blows my theory out the water :slight_smile:

HD or SSD ought not to have anything to do with this unless you are running very low on memory. Although I only have 16GB of memory, I don’t think I ever see my computer resorting to virtual memory.

One case where the drive speed could matter is where if SketchUp has to go around every component and material file in your collection, to open the file to make sure the incoming object isn’t going to clash with it. You could use task manager or process monitor to see what files are being read during that time.

Box, with no SSD, got 4 seconds and 19 seconds. My work PC, no SSD, got 2 seconds and 16 seconds. My Mac that only has SSD, less powerful than my PC, was under 5 seconds for both. A colleague with a fast PC got about 2-3 seconds for both. I will ask him if he is using SSD.

@colin Note my second test on a better PC.

Thanks, see that now.

I’m still pursuing my idea about the size of your collections being significant. Someone kindly gave me a lot of components and materials to try. Once I have those in place I will check my timings again.

That test didn’t take too long. Adding 319 components and 389 materials only changed the time from 3.5 seconds to 4.2 seconds.

1 Like