Vol vs Lun snap restore

[tk_venugopal]

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]?

[aborzenkov]

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.

[ivisinfo]

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.

[scottgelb]

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.