>Can you explain why you'd run Reiserfs on the cache partition? I've heard that Reiserfs is faster than ext2 when working with lots of small files such as those on a cache partition. >The testing I have done, shows ext2 faster the Reiserfs, and on a cache fs, I >don't think journaling is necessary or needed (IMHO). That's interesting to hear. I've read on a couple web sites (http://www.swelltech.com/pengies/joe/benchmarks.html is one of them) that had benchmarked ext2 and Reiserfs cache partitions and they saw significant performance increases with Reiserfs. I'd be interested in seeing your results if you have them documented. I agree that journaling is not needed for a cache partition but it sure would be nice not having to run fsck on 27Gb of small files if it were to crash ;-) Jon