Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.198.46.95

Message Too Old, No Replies

Google Datacenters Watch: 2006-01-16

Observations, Analysis and Remarks

     
6:59 am on Jan 16, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



< continued from [webmasterworld.com...] >

"Celebrating" Allegra Update Anniversary Day

Good morning Folks

Life on Google DCs is much more wonderful than you will ever think :-)

Approaching February 2006, I feel like it just happened yesterday or last week or last month. I'm talking about that Allegra update which changed the map of Google serps once and for all on 2nd February 2005.

I recall loosing 75% of my Google's referrals at that black cold February day. Then the sad stories of other fellow members started to appeare on the threads.

IMO, Allegra was a turning point of the relation between the SEO's specialists and Google. Since then Google carried out an undeclared war against what most SEO's were making living of. Some wise SEO's understood at once the situation and started to adapt and deal with the new environment. Others kept dreaming about the return of the good old Google Dance days.

February is a good time for "savage" Google's updates. Better you keep your eyes opened and watch closely whats taking place on the DCs. And keep your focus on small and big changes on DCs such as

[64.233.179.99...]
[64.233.179.104...]

And lets be wise and forget all about the Smoke and Mirrors of a BigDaddy or a BigMammy :-)

I wish you all a great day and a successful week.

[edited by: tedster at 8:52 am (utc) on Jan. 16, 2006]

[edited by: lawman at 11:56 am (utc) on Jan. 16, 2006]

5:11 pm on Jan 18, 2006 (gmt 0)



I predict a major change within two weeks. Traditionally google has done relatively major algo changes on February, and it's been a while since jagger.
5:46 pm on Jan 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I predict a major change within two weeks. Traditionally google has done relatively major algo changes on February, and it's been a while since jagger.

Do you think that the changes will be in tune with the test DC results? or with the results that are being shown after december last week update?

8:10 pm on Jan 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member steveb is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



I think the folks at the plex are perplexed that the results on the test DC were so different than the regular ones, despite them thinking they weren't doing a ranking update. With virtually no meaningful canonical fixes applied by Big Daddy they have been likely very unsure of what exactly they have on their hands. No doubt the Big daddy results will become the main body of results, but when they do they should be only around briefly, because if the infrastructure is put in place and in the future does anything to fix (most) canonical issues, there will be massive changes in the results. There just isn't any evidence that anything is working right across the board now, so it seems there will be a lot more waiting to do.

===

Heh, just checked the test DC and saw how unstable it was just refreshing the page... one time a sites index page would rank #6 without the www, while another refresh the index page would rank #11 with the www. Canonical problems get worse every day.

8:23 pm on Jan 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Can someone please explain what the DC`s are showing? It all looks the same to me. Please explain what all the DC watching is and why I need to do it.
Thanks
AfterBurner
8:40 pm on Jan 18, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member




>>Walkman: good prediction, i am betting for a change soon too but within 3-4 weeks

It might feature some huge changes for quite some time, internal PR being changed according to the size of the new index + new filters on texlink networks or something...stay tuned google fans! :)

8:54 am on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member powdork is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



[66.249.93.104...] is currently showing very new and very disturbing results (for me anyway).
Nothing I've seen before.

added: Naturally, it is suffering from major canonical issues; much worse than the ones BigDaddy had supposedly fixed for this site.

9:11 am on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)



Hi Powdork

I've noticed on these non-BD results that all of my pages are accurately cached and up to date, there are no supplimentals for my old site and I'm getting crawled quite regularly and updates are listed in a few days.

With BD results I've got hundreds of supplimentals, non-existant duplicates and 1 year old cache. Is it possible that we're on for a merge between the two results soon? Maybe to bring the cache up to date on the BD results and eventually lead to an overall update.

All the best

Col :-)

9:30 am on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Steveb

From where I sit Google has made significant progress on Homepage Canonical Problems.... it is just the ranking and the related crawling based on these infastructure changes has not been updated as a result....IMO.

The Canonical problems you are discussing (except from your precise example) - do they relate to homepages in general or internal pages?

If they are internal pages which have resulted in one going supplimental Google may not see it as an issue based on MC comments that the supplimental lays over the top of the normal results.

I 100% agree that once the new infastructure is in use then we will see big changes.

11:40 am on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Bring on the big changes. Even a blind dog finds a bone from time to time. LOL
11:57 am on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member zeus is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



today I saw a little increase in pictures from our site on google image from the www version of our site, BUT also still 3 times more of the non www version in google image.
12:04 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Today I am seeing the Mozilla Googlebot DCs cache dates appearing on other DCs - although the serps are not showing the BD results......

Hmmmz - I think we are getting close to a roll out....

12:13 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Dayo_UK

>>Hmmmz - I think we are getting close to a roll out....<<

I think we are getting close to update Allegra-II ;-)

12:29 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member


what is the hot DC that I should be watching?
12:31 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



[64.233.179.99...]

Whether this will look like the final results though I am not sure.... it does look like all caches on all dcs are the same as this DC for me - although serps are only on this one and the other one mentioned above - [66.249.93.104...]

12:33 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



afterburner

>>what is the hot DC that I should be watching? <<

At the plex, they call them; reseller's DCs :-)

[64.233.179.99...]
[64.233.179.104...]

Enjoy.

1:00 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



thanks reseller ... and the smart money is on Google updating soon, right?
1:05 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



afterburner

>>thanks reseller ... and the smart money is on Google updating soon, right?<<

Exactly ;-)

1:21 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



My rankings are all good on 64.233.179.104 except for home page links - still nowhere or ranking poorly.
1:27 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Ok - the following DC groups seem to be using cache from the Mozilla Googlebot crawl - they are not showing the serps of Big Daddy Dcs though:-

216.239.37.*
216.239.39.*
216.239.59.*
64.233.161.*
64.233.171.*
64.233.179.* - Mozilla Googlebot crawl + BD results.
64.233.183.*
64.233.185.*
64.233.187.*
66.102.9.*
66.102.11.*

2:47 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



On the BD data centers I am seeing

"301 Moved Permanently
Moved Permanently. The document has moved here. Apache/1.3.34 Server at
www.mysite.com Port 80."

Instead of the description and title of my pages.

This is new and obviously due to the 301 redirect I did.

So the question is, is anyone else seeing this?
is it normal?
or did I screw up with the redirect?

Should it not follow the redirect then go and fetch the contents of the page and thus populate the page title and description correctly....:(

3:11 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



I don't think you should be seeing that - how did you do the redirect? Was it done via an htaccess file, or using PHP headers?
3:14 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member billys is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



cleanup -

Based on what you're describing, you might not have that 301 set up correctly. You should pay a visit to the Apache forum here, basically the code in .htaccess should be something like:

# Setup
RewriteEngine on
# redirect non-www to www
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^example\.com
RewriteRule ^/(.*)$ http://www.example.com/$1 [R=301,L]

That formum and Jim are very helpful over there, you might want to describe to them what you've done.

3:19 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member billys is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member



On another note, right now I see two different sets of results. Rank Pulse indicates there's been a pretty big move lately. I'm not sure who mentioned this, but everyone once in a while I see a third set of results that disappear on the next query. I saw those results here:

[64.233.183.99...]

I have to say that I've never seen them before and they finally seem to be ranking my site correctly for this particular query (my test query). (They are gone now)

3:33 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



There has been a lot of talk off and on about G wanting feedback on the BigDaddy dc. How are they getting feedback? Thru this forum and others or do they want it in email? I would just like to give them feedback about trashing my site.
4:15 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



cleanup

Just looked via a server header check at your site and the pages showing in the serps as 301 Moved Permanetly etc.....

301 looks like it is working fine - of course feel free to check in the apache forum too.

Is a strange one and if you do a search on that text you can see you are not the only one.....

Hmmz - confirmation from Google would be nice if this is something to worry about or not.

G does not always follow the 301 immediately and I think GG/MC has said that it gets added to a list of urls to crawl.....it might just be a holding stage before the correct url is crawled...

eg. looking at your site, say page:-

domain.com/madrid.html has been crawled and now shows as the 301 moved perm page to www.domain.com/madrid.html the www page may not have been crawled yet so maybe this is what G displays until the www page is crawled.

Not sure.

4:29 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Thanks guys, these are the two redirects I use.
They do seem to work OK. So I surprised that this error crops up.

Options +FollowSymLinks
RewriteEngine on
RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^mysite\.com
RewriteRule ^(.*)$ [mysite.com...] [R=permanent,L]

RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} ^[A-Z]{3,9}\ /.*index\.html\ HTTP/
RewriteRule ^(.*)index\.html$ /$1 [R=301,L]

Dayo_UK, - intermetiate stage - Yes, thats what I am hoping.

I am getting used to waiting recently so a bit longer won't hurt.

In fact even though it looks dire, these days any change is welcome even if it looks worse!

4:40 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Dayo_UK

>>From where I sit Google has made significant progress on Homepage Canonical Problems>>

What is the best way to determine if Google has fixed the homepage canonical problem on my site? What should I be looking at?

If I do site:mysite.com on Big Daddy, my homepage does not even show up in the first 1000 results.

I still have thousands of supplementals, but on 66.249.93.104, the supplementals sometimes appear as URL only. If I hit refresh, the supplementals are back with title and snippet.

I have had a 301 for non-www to www and for moved pages in place since July.

Thanks for all your help.

4:48 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



qwerty

Assuming redirecting from non-www to www.

When I query domain.com in the test DCs google is returning www.domain.com.

If I query site:domain.com -www the domain.com homepage is not listed.

This is true on a couple of sites I have not done a 301 on too.

In some cirumstance the www.domain.com had not been crawled for ages - these pages have now been crawled succesfully on the test DC a few times.

Googlebot is also indexing pages linked from the homepage again (not to deep yet - but a little) - this has not happened for a long while for my site - as if the homepage had no power.

Of course this could be a result of coming out of a Hijack - I am not sure - I dont think I was hijacked but Canonical probs and Hijacking are closely linked I believe.

>>>If I do site:mysite.com on Big Daddy, my homepage does not even show up in the first 1000 results.

This is where I hope ranking improvements will follow once G are happy with there new infastructure.

5:14 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



At the risk of appearing stupid...

This whole canonicals, www.mysite.com vs. mysite.com issue is rather ludicrous, IMO.

My guess is that the majority, perhaps the vast majority of webmasters, excluding, those who read Webmaster World (or other SEO fora), are completely unaware of the issue.

Of those who read Webmaster World (et al), a good number muck up their canonicals "fix" (301 redirects, .htaccess, etc., whatever). Even the "experts" are confused!

Why doesn't Google just solve this problem, end this confusion at their end?

Why doesn't Google just assume that for the vast majority of websites, www.mysite.com and mysite.com are one and the same website? I think it's a safe assumption. (Also that the URLs "www.mysite.com", "www.mysite.com/", "mysite.com", "mysite.com/", etc., are all one and the same.)

Then Google should just treat them as being identical. No duplicate listings, no penalties, no outright bans, no adverse consequences whatsoever.

Sometimes the simplest solution, fixed at one central point (at Google), is the best solution of all. Simply make this a non-issue, take it out of consideration.

Then we can all move on to much more important things.

So a few black hat SEOs might exploit this to their advantage? So at a few places around the Web www.mysite.com and mysite.com might in fact be two different websites with substantially different content? So what? Is it worth causing endless aggravation to the silent (not so silent at Webmaster World) majority of suffering (even if they don't know it) webmasters--again, most of whom don't hang out at SEO fora and are quite literally clueless and unaware?

What am I missing here?

5:27 pm on Jan 19, 2006 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member




"what am I missing here?"

Nothing..just Google to take notice.

Why can't we pay for a decent crawl and inclusion?

Like Inktomi used to, at least we might get hoplessly tangled sites (in Googles index) untangled! again.

This 209 message thread spans 7 pages: 209
 

Featured Threads

Hot Threads This Week

Hot Threads This Month