Vol vs Lun snap restore

Hi Team - can anyone help me to understand below restore policy.

1.Either Vol or  Lun snap restore is faster?

2.Which one generally is the best option ?

3. apart from vol & lun snap restore do we have any other product/service ?

example: I have a Flex volume [7TB] with 8 luns,

somehow five luns out of eight which is running Or'cle db got corrupted.

so, in the case what kind of solution will be faster?

-lun restore,vol restore[if im ok to restore remaining 3 including 5 impacted luns]?

Re: Vol vs Lun snap restore

What exactly do you mean under “llun restore” or “vol restore”? Such commands do not exist. There are “snap restore -t volume” or “snap restore -t file”. If you compare them, file restore is very slow and volume restore is near to instant.

Re: Vol vs Lun snap restore

Vol restore is always faster, you have to have the SnapRestore license though.

LUN restore is actually a Single File SnapRestore (SFSR), since a LUN is a file in the storage. SFSR restore is slower, siche WAFL has to work a lot with specific blocks. This could take a lot of time depending on the vol/lun size and space usablity. If you do it with command line, I think you will have to wait for the operation to complete (runs in the foreground). You can also do it with SnapDrive.

Apart from the above, a major difference is that with vol restore you restore all the volume contents, including snapshots.

Re: Vol vs Lun snap restore

You could also Lun clone, then Lun clone split. Clone is fast and split works in the background. If you have the room it makes it more granular to restore/copy one Lun without affecting the other 7 with a full volume snaprestore. Or sis clone can be used of you have a Flexclone license and dedup enabled on the volume. The end result is a split clone with dedup on it already.