The Ptolemaic Dynasty did rule in Egypt, however they were of Macedonian origin. Ptolemy I Soter was a distinguished general in Alexander the Great's army, who became the Satrap (governor of a province) of Egypt in 323 BC when Alexander died. So ethnically, this line of Kings was not Egyptian.

However, despite this ethnic distinction, Ptolemy I treated the Jewish people no better than their Egyptian forebearers. In 319 BCE, Ptolemy I seized Jerusalem on the Sabbath, which is a double trespass in the eyes of Jewish people. The Tanakh (Jewish Bible) teaches that the land of Judea was given to them by Yahweh in the Mosaic covenant and was safeguarded by him (Ex 23.31), so any occupation of the holy city of God was viewed as a violation of their covenant, but also he attacked on the Sabbath which did not allow the Jewish people to defend themselves (Josephus, Anitquities XII.6). Following the conquest Ptolemy took many Jewish prisoners back to Egypt which formed the basis of a large Jewish Community in Alexandria (AYBD Vol 5. 541).

Interestingly enough, once Ptolemy had brought the captives back to Alexandria he granted them equal rights with many Macedonian citizens, and according to Josephus many Jews moved to Alexandria of their own accord (Josephus XII.9). So they were conquered but treated with respect and dignity.

After Ptolemy I died, his son Ptolemy Philadelphus freed the Jewish captives in Alexandria AND facilitated one of the most important works for Jewish (and later Christian) people, the Septuagint. Ptolemy Philadelphus wanted a translation of every book in the world for his library and that included a copy of Jewish Tanakh (The law, prophets, and writings, what Christians call the Old Testament). Philadelphus wanted a translation of the Tanakh in Greek, but none existed. So he brought, according to tradition, 70 Jewish scholars to translate the Tanakh into Greek (Josephus XII.12-16)

So while they were a conquered people, the Ptolemaic dynasty treated a large portion of the Jewish population with more respect than would be expected from a conqueror. And while the Jewish identity during the 200s BCE was still intertwined with their sole sovereignty over their God-given land, the Ptolemy placated them with rights and a respect for their religious identity and tradition.

For much of its history the Israelite polity in the southern Levant was under the domination of foreign empires and rulers: the Babylonians, the Achaemenid Persians, Ptolemaic Egypt, the Seleucid Empire, and the Romans among others. All foreign rulers seem to have experienced some degree of Jewish unrest, most notably the bloody Roman-Jewish Wars. And certainly the Jewish religion played a part in that unrest, with the foreign occupiers cast as idolatrous pagans in the Jewish monotheist worldview.

But I don't know of any sources claiming that the Biblical story of the Exodus was a major factor in Jewish unrest during the Ptolomeic period. No major uprising took place in Judea during the Ptolemaic era; the next one would be the Maccabean revolt in 168 BC, which was against the Selucids, who had taken Judea from the Greco-Egyptians.

But there are some records of unrest and resentment against the Ptolemaic regime in Judea and in Jerusalem, specifically at the time of the Seleucid conquest. From Josephus via Wikipedia:

In 200 BC, during the Fifth Syrian War, Antiochus III defeated the Ptolemaic army at the Battle of Panium, bringing an end to Ptolemaic control of Judea. According to Josephus, the Egyptian garrison still held out at the city's citadel when the Seleucid army arrived at Jerusalem. Aided by the local Jewish population, Antiochus besieged the fort and brought about it capitulation. Grateful for their assistance, Antiochus published a decree granting the Jews religious freedoms.

Michael Zank, Prof. of Religion at Boston University, writes:

After the Ptolemaic garrison is driven from Jerusalem, Antiochus, welcomed by an established pro-Syrian party among the priestly aristocrats who hoped for a more lenient system of administration, reaffirmed the right of the Yehudim to live by their paternal laws.

So it seems that there was some resentment of Ptolemaic rule, based at least partly on religious grounds, although seemingly related more to Jewish freedom to worship and keep customs and traditions, than to resentment over enslavement in Egypt. Modern archaeology and scholarship have found no evidence that the enslavement or Exodus actually happened. But even if the Ptolemaic-era Jews believed it, the story took place hundreds of years before their time, during a native Egyptian dynasty rather than a post-Alexandrian Hellenized regime.

The grievances of the present day, apparently related to Ptolomaic restrictions on or disrespect for their religious laws/customs, would have been more important than some grudge out of the legendary past. It's easy for a modern person to sort of compress ancient history and assume everything happened close together, but Ptolomeic rule over Jerusalem was from circa 301-198 BC, while the supposed Exodus, which likely never even happened, has a much murkier date traditionally estimated to circa 1400 BC. While any group has its legendary history which can certainly influence its worldview, present-day problems and politics are usually more important.