| 6:13 am on Jul 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Yes inktomi have been crawling some of my dynamic pages for quite a while, to me it seems to be a bit harder to get dynamic url's indexed for free if you compare with Google and Fast.
| 5:56 pm on Jul 12, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Very recently Inktomi crawled my dynamic pages and has so far indexed around 300 of them. (I've not paid for any inclusion.) Google, on the other hand, has yet to even crawl beyond the three static pages on the same site, the index page only of which has been in the G. index for about one year.
| 4:18 pm on Jul 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I am not sure what triggers Ink to crawl deep into dynamic pages (lots of inbound links?). All I can say is that once Slurp decides to do it they will go deep, over time. As verbum states, deeper than Google in many instances.
| 10:36 am on Jul 14, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I can vouch for that Brad - have had Inktomi going very hard at our site for the last week. Very deep and grabbing most of the dynamic URL's (some with three or four variables).
We have not paid for inclusion.
| 7:03 am on Jul 15, 2003 (gmt 0)|
I've seen Inktomi crawling my dynamic pages for quite awhile. However, I just assumed that they wouldn't index them. I got that impression from the blurb at [inktomi.com...] which states "dynamically generated links and documents can be different for every retrieval so there is no use in indexing them.". However, I didn't really understand the reasoning. The dynamically generated pages I usually see seem to remain just as stable as static HTML pages for any given URL.
| 3:09 am on Aug 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
i donno if inktomi is on drugs
but it hasnt been spidering my dynamic urls properly
for some reason it decides to look for
every other spider does the second, but because inktomi does the first it gets a 404.
Is there a reason it does that?
google, ask have done it properly , as well as wisenutbot.
anyone have a clue?
| 4:32 am on Aug 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
Yeah, I noticed that. It always strips the last slash. I don't know why, except that Slurp is pretty buggy. Any chance of fixing your pages to either work without the slash, or return a 301 redirect?
| 2:29 pm on Aug 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|
They have opened a can of worms ;)
A search for aluminum element [search.positiontech.com] returns me lovely spammy results :)
On the second page, there are several those-long-titled-results which redirect to one commercial site..
Is it so easy to spam ink?
| 3:10 pm on Aug 13, 2003 (gmt 0)|