homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.225.57.156
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
Forum Library, Charter, Moderator: open

Google News Archive Forum

This 302 message thread spans 11 pages: < < 302 ( 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 > >     
Update Dominic - Part 9
Will it ever settle?
rfgdxm1




msg:108363
 6:12 am on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

....Continued from here [webmasterworld.com]
--------------------------------------------------------

I just checked all 9 datacenters. Only -sj and -fi have the new index.

 

thereuare




msg:108423
 1:54 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

New user here, lurker for a couple weeks!

I can confirm that Yahoo is being given something other than -sj or -fi.

My site is only about 3 months old, and i've been deep crawled already. I was baffled when my site first appeared 2 weeks after submission but then disappeared in a few days... but i'm learning now!

Anyway, a competitor of mine and I started around the same time, and i know that my site is MUCH more extensive then theirs (200+ pages vs 10 pages), although neither of us have many links. Their site does NOT appear at all in www, -sj, -fi, or any of the other datacenters for the keywords i'm checking, and puts us in the first or second page at -sj and -fi. (EDIT: they are now in www and datacenters other than -sj and -fi). When i try the same searches on Yahoo, our site is no where to be found, and their site is on the first page!

So there is definately a difference between what google is showing at -sj and -fi and what they're sending to Yahoo (and AOL?)

I'm hoping that their listing is just a result of freshbot and will soon disappear, or at the very least they all revert to -sj or -fi... but i'm perplexed as to how the results can be so different at Yahoo and the Google datacenters.

[edited by: thereuare at 2:06 pm (utc) on May 14, 2003]

trillianjedi




msg:108424
 1:56 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Its more likely a full blown content switching system that dynamically switches your query to the datacenter experiencing the least load at the instant you execute your query, combined with other geographical and reachability paramaters.

Highly likely, I agree 100%. "Round Robin" DNS, even if not strictly accurate, is a simple way of looking at it. It's not meant to be patronising.

@ Amazed:-

Because GoogleGuy has stated about 4 times now that is the case. And until I see some evidence to the contrary, then I'm inclined to take his word for it. If you have some evidence to the contrary, please enlighten us.

@ John5:-

That won't work. You're looking at either -sj or -fi. It has been continuous for 2-3 hours for you because (my best guess) your DNS cache (either your end or at your ISP) has not yet been flushed. I have not had stable results from www for 2-3 hours. It is still bouncing around the various datacentres as it does. I have no DNS cache (manually disabled).

TJ

wackmaster




msg:108425
 1:57 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

TJ,

Yes. I've been pointing out that -sj and -fi not the same, though they keep getting mentioned as though they were. GG kept talking about -sj as the lead horse, but for the last day it appeared to be -fi mainly. I'll assume however that -sj perhaps lagged a day or so and that now that the caches are in there, it will start seeing the light of day...

It also appears to us that Yahoo and AOL were not getting the same rotation of data centers over last 24 hours. Even rotation is not the norm with load balancing...but we have mainly seen the older (pre-update) SERP's on Yahoo!, versus old plus -fi on AOL, but again we're just one observer and everyone else might be seeing different results. We keep clearing browser caches and hitting from different access points, but who knows.

NEWS FLASH: What do you know! We're starting to see the -sj SERP's on AOL for the first time. Now I'm really wondering...were they there all along and we just happenend to miss them despite our hundreds of look-see's, or has -sj just been opened up into the rotation...

mrbrad




msg:108426
 2:03 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Every time I have looked at AOL, including now, they have been using the -fi data.

I know this because my site is nowhere to be found in -fi and in -sj it has rankings I only once dreamed about.

There is a HUGE difference between -sj and -fi from my perspective.

trillianjedi




msg:108427
 2:06 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Wackmaster,

I wouldn't put my life on it, but I'm *pretty* certain that I saw a flash of -sj results on aol last night.

For the keywords that I check the difference between sj and fi is actually quite subtle (I know it's radically different with others). At the time I put it down to everflux (and maybe some more backlinks coming in to fi) but after thinking about it for a while, and looking at sj I concluded it was SJ.

What I'm not clear on, and haven't had time to check out for myself, is if the load-balancing (maybe it's clearer to people if we talk in those terms?) includes the other indexes? Or has aol *only* been using -fi and possibly -sj?

If the latter, to handle that kind of loading, would google not have had to upgrade those two datacentres substantially?

TJ

Dayo_UK




msg:108428
 2:07 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

thereuare

Hi welcome to the board.

When looking at Yahoo results you have to be careful when comparing it to other datacentres - Yahoo apply different filters from Google and this can makes some difference to the results.

So it is likely that Yahoo is receiving FI/SJ or WWW and they dont match with what you are seeing on the Google sites as Yahoo may have applied a different filter.

thereuare




msg:108429
 2:11 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

THANKS for clarifying.

One more question open to anyone...

On -sj and -fi i rank 11 and 12 for one of the keyword searches i do, should my next step be to add more of these keywords to my site so that i'll <hopefully> move to the first page in spots 1-10?

I've already done some other optomizing for the site in general, but is this how you optomize for specific keywords, by adding more of those words to your site?

adsoft13




msg:108430
 2:15 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

For the last 20 hours or so aol is showing similar to fi (NOT sj) results for my keywords ...
however they are kind of different from fi, but not too much.

wackmaster




msg:108431
 2:19 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

<Every time I have looked at AOL, including now, they have been using the -fi data.>

That doesn't mean it's always so for everyone. We were seeing boucing around on AOL yesterday when these results first started going to the partner sites, then AOL seemed to settle in to -fi, as you say.

But I promise, I'm looking at -sj on AOL, right now, so it IS finding its way in.

<There is a HUGE difference between -sj and -fi from my perspective.>

We went slightly up in one, down in the other, but our up move is a bit better than the loss in the down move. Still I agree that there's real difference, and have been commenting on the poorer quality of -fi. Apparently from some posts, there are those who think that if I trash -fi, -fi must not be treating me well, but not the case. I just see more spam and some obvious #1 sites (not ours) that have dropped in -fi, whereas -sj seems more well rounded.

Then there's the fact that GG keeps reminding us that the SERP's for -sj AND -fi are likely to shift, as more backlinks, filters, etc. are brought in...so all we can do for now is give GG the input and hope that it helps them maintain their generally very high quality over time.

wackmaster




msg:108432
 2:30 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

<I wouldn't put my life on it, but I'm *pretty* certain that I saw a flash of -sj results on aol last night.>

I think we've seen some bouncing around too. No idea if it was just part of the update. Mainly though we were seeing -fi on AOL and the older SERP's on Yahoo!...until just an hour or so ago.

<What I'm not clear on, and haven't had time to check out for myself, is if the load-balancing (maybe it's clearer to people if we talk in those terms?) includes the other indexes? Or has aol *only* been using -fi and possibly -sj? If the latter, to handle that kind of loading, would google not have had to upgrade those two datacentres substantially?>

Good question. Actually, I had assumed that each new index was fed to Yahoo/AOL with each update, similar to the way G imports ODP data for their directory. But maybe that doesn't make sense now that you mention it. I know that with Adwords, the updates are not real time, but the lag is minutes or hours only.

And, if G is moving to ongoing/rolling updates rather than the monthly thing, then the feed would be a necessity. For all we know, part of this new testing G is doing could be that they HAVE upgraded certain data centers, precisely for the reason you point out, and the slow roll out is designed in stages to QC the whole thing.

Man, I have better things to do. This damn forum is killing me. I've got to get back to work. ;-)

wackmaster




msg:108433
 2:41 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

TJ - I take it back...makes more sense for Y and A to just access the entire G data center network, don't you think? (Guess I didn't get back to work completely.)

trillianjedi




msg:108434
 2:44 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

And, if G is moving to ongoing/rolling updates rather than the monthly thing, then the feed would be a necessity. For all we know, part of this new testing G is doing could be that they HAVE upgraded certain data centers, precisely for the reason you point out, and the slow roll out is designed in stages to QC the whole thing.

Could be, yes. But I don't really know enough about the inner workings of aol to really comment on that. Would it not be possible though, for example, for aol to keep their own datacentre "copy" index on their own machines, which gets the rolling update in the same way as the googleplex is aiming to get a rolling update?

I was actually guessing that aol was simply pointing its searches at -fi (and possibly -sj). But you seem to think they had (at least in the past) their own datacentre.

I really don't know the answer, but I'm pretty sure we'll all know in a week or two.

Now get back to work!

TJ

soapystar




msg:108435
 2:44 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

personally ihave entirely different results across yahoo, aol, -sj, -ex, -fi, ..not slightly different but first page to nowhere difference...and for the sites around me...every server shows a variation of results.....and get this...on aol where im gone completely one site has 4 listings for the same search....all one after the other..all on the same domain....WAY TO GO GOOGLE.....!

Dayo_UK




msg:108436
 2:49 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

thereuare..

Regarding Keyword Density and getting to the front page.

It is a combination of factors:-

Keyword Density.
Keyword in links to your site.
Page Rank.
Number of links to your site.
etc etc

trillianjedi




msg:108437
 2:49 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

TJ - I take it back...makes more sense for Y and A to just access the entire G data center network, don't you think? (Guess I didn't get back to work completely

Crossed in the post.....

To me, yes it makes more sense for aol to use google's datacentres rather than having to get involved in the update process each time.

The fact that we (maybe) have seen instances of -sj results on aol indicates that is the case. But I really don't know for sure.

If they do use googles datacentres - and only use one or possibly two of them, I'd be surprised if google have not upgraded those datacentres on a big scale. That would indicate big changes in the pipeline would it not? Maybe different algo's for different partners too.

Out of interest, does anyone know if -fi is new or been around a while?

TJ

GoogleGuy




msg:108438
 3:23 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

I wouldn't draw huge distinctions between sj and fi. When I say "I expect the sj index to spread to other data centers," that could be sj or fi.

trillianjedi




msg:108439
 3:28 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

In other words, it's going to be -fi.....

There do seem to be huge distinctions between sj and fi, at least in the results.

TJ

parabola




msg:108440
 3:30 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

I think we all anticipated fi, seeing as how it is already on AOL

amazed




msg:108441
 3:31 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

according to efactory -fi went online in May 2003

cindysunc




msg:108442
 3:33 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Whats up with the fresh dates yesterday? About half my interior pages that never get fresh dates had them, May 13th. Usually just my index page and a few other pages got them.

trillianjedi




msg:108443
 3:38 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

according to efactory -fi went online in May 2003

I think it must be older than that?

If not, that is *very* interesting..... new datacentre that just happens to be supplying aol all on it's own?

TJ

jimun




msg:108444
 3:43 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

Has anyone had changes in page rank?

textex




msg:108445
 3:49 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

IS anyone noticing too much page rank, or too a penalty for too many links with same kw's in anchor text?

cindysunc




msg:108446
 3:57 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

About the fresh dates, i'm seeing new traffic from those pages, that got updated yesterday. About half my pages got fresh dates. Who knows maybe Google is updating different than everybody thinks. I just know i picked up 80 pages and fresh dates on pages that never got fresh dates before and traffic is very nice today. And this is all on the main Google

jjdesigns4u




msg:108447
 4:02 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

is www2 and www3 showing the same results as sj or fi?

Thanks

DroffatsX3




msg:108448
 4:09 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

>>>I wouldn't draw huge distinctions between sj and fi. When I say "I expect the sj index to spread to other data centers," that could be sj or fi.

The reason people are making distinctions is because the SERPs differ in -sj and -fi.

Dayo_UK




msg:108449
 4:11 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

I still stand by what I have said before - that SJ and FI are the same but FI has more recent data captured by Freshbot....

jjdesigns4u




msg:108450
 4:17 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

are www2 or 3 showing the same as sf or fi

are they pointing to them?

Dayo_UK




msg:108451
 4:19 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

jjdesigns4u

Looks like SJ data to me :¦

strategies




msg:108452
 4:24 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

i have www showing -fi data

trillianjedi




msg:108453
 4:26 pm on May 14, 2003 (gmt 0)

i have www showing -fi data

lol

TJ

This 302 message thread spans 11 pages: < < 302 ( 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 > >
Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Google / Google News Archive
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved