Introducing PowerFlex File Services 4.0 – Part 2

NAS Protocols

Following on from my first post which you can read here

Most vendors provide similar NAS protocols as PowerFlex File, such as SMB and NFS. However, the support for other protocols, such as Object and HDFS, may vary. Also, the implementation and performance of each protocol can differ between vendors.

For example, some vendors may only support SMB or NFS for file sharing, while others may also support protocols like Apple Filing Protocol (AFP) for Mac environments or Server Message Block version 3 (SMBv3) for improved performance and security.

In terms of performance, some vendors may have proprietary implementations of the NAS protocols that provide better performance or features, such as caching and data compression. However, PowerFlex File is designed to deliver high-performance file services that leverage the system’s distributed architecture to provide low latency and high throughput.

Another factor that may differ between vendors is the level of management and automation of the file services. Some vendors may provide more advanced management tools and automation capabilities that allow administrators to easily manage and monitor the file services, while others may provide more basic tools.

Overall, while the NAS protocols offered by PowerFlex File may not differ significantly from those offered by other vendors, the implementation and performance of these protocols may vary. PowerFlex File is designed to provide a highly scalable and flexible unified storage platform with high performance and easy management capabilities, making it a strong choice for organizations seeking an enterprise-grade file service solution.

Quick walkthrough of setting up NAS protocol for PowerFlex

In PowerFlex OS 4.0, the GUI has minor revamp to include File service as one of the drop-down menu.


To make the GUI experience intuitive and easy to navigate, the design prioritizes the first item on the list to be the first action to be taken. In this case, the first item on the list is the NAS server, indicating that creating a NAS server is the first task that needs to be done. The next item on the list is the file system, followed by others in sequence.

It is during the NAS server creation process that one will need to decide which protocol the NAS server will run on, whether it be SMB, NFS, or a combination of both.

There is always pro and con of running both SMB and NFS on a single NAS server.

On the one hand, it simplifies management and can be cost-effective since it reduces the need for additional hardware and software licenses, while also helping to better utilize resources by enabling the sharing of resources across multiple protocols. On the other hand, it can result in reduced performance due to contention caused by the system’s need to allocate resources to different protocols simultaneously. Additionally, running SMB and NFS on a single NAS server may limit scalability as it may not be able to support growing storage and performance requirements, and may also create security risks by requiring the opening of multiple ports to enable access to different protocols, which can make the system more vulnerable to attacks. Hence, while it can be a simplified and cost-effective approach for small-scale environments, as the storage and performance requirements grow, it may become necessary to consider separate storage systems for each protocol to achieve better performance and scalability while also minimizing security risks.


Choosing between SMB or NFS is easy, one is for Windows operating system, while NFS is commonly used for Unix-based systems like Linux.


However, with NFS, it’s important to note that there are two different versions: NFSv3 and NFSv4. NFSv4 offers several advantages over NFSv3. Firstly, NFSv4 has more advanced security features, such as support for Kerberos authentication, while NFSv3 relies on less secure authentication methods like IP addresses and hostnames. Secondly, NFSv4 has better performance than NFSv3 in certain scenarios, such as when dealing with large files or high-latency networks, because of its more efficient data transfer protocol. Thirdly, NFSv4 is a stateful protocol, which allows it to maintain information about the state of file operations between the client and server, thereby improving consistency and reliability of file access. NFSv3, in contrast, is stateless. Fourthly, while NFSv3 is more widely supported due to its longer establishment, many modern systems now support NFSv4. Finally, NFSv4 also offers additional features that are not present in NFSv3, such as support for file delegations and improved support for file locking.

That is no right or wrong answer, the decision to use NFSv4 versus NFSv3 will depend on specific requirements, such as compatibility with existing systems, available resources, and required security features.

SMB Share

For ease of demonstration, SMB share will be used. Once it has been decided on which protocol to use, just follow through the wizard,

  1. Create file system

2. Select storage pool, give a name and size

3. Fill in the detail for NFS if required, if not, just press next and go straight to SMB Share

4. Fill in the detail for SMB Share

5. Once it is done, it will show up in the SMB Shares screen

6. Finally, map the path to the windows explorer as shown

The entire configuration process for implementing SMB and NFS on a single or multi NAS server is relatively straightforward and easy to navigate. However, it’s important to note that proper planning is key to ensuring ease of management in any organization. This includes factors such as determining the appropriate resource allocation for each protocol, setting up appropriate security measures to protect against potential vulnerabilities, and designing a backup and recovery plan to minimize the risk of data loss. By carefully considering these factors during the planning stages, organizations can ensure that their SMB and NFS implementation is not only effective but also easy to manage and maintain over time.

Share the Post:

Related Posts

%d bloggers like this: