Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
The Survivors of BigDaddy :-)
Good morning Folks
It seems the following 3 remaining sets of "old" DCs refuse to be converted to BigDaddy!
Enjoy the look of the old infrastructure while its still there ;-)
[edited by: tedster at 7:40 am (utc) on Mar. 21, 2006]
Looking at BD results on other datacentres, I see no improvements in indexing, and all the Supplemental pages, phantom listings, and screw ups are still there, just as bad as they were 6 or 9 months ago.
"So, 184.108.40.206 has reverted to non-BD for the last few hours."
However, its a BigDaddy DC at this moment 6:02 am (GMT+1).
From what I'm reading of other posts. It seems that some DCs are swinging at present.. BigDaddy...Non-BigDaddy etc..
The only non-Bigdaddy DCs I see at this moment are:
But that could change as well at any moment ;-)
Pleas advise....And sorry if I highjacked this thread but didn't want to start a new thread when we are all still talking BD and the rollout of datacenters.
Google : If this is the new index I am amazed at how good the results actually are.....BD is surely reflected on these two datacenters with a little mix of something else that IMHO has increased the search quality dramatically.
I cant notice anything significantly different on those DCs - sites that I monitor that have Supplemental problems still do.
It does look like 216.239.59.*s are the only Non-Big Daddy DCs at the moment - although 66.249.87.*s is showing Big Daddy serps but has Non-Big Daddy cache.
Interesting because I cannot find a supplemental result on either datacenter. Would you care to PM me what it is you are seeing? These two datacenters to me simply are an extension of BD but I dunno for sure. The results are definitely different. And also to add to thread about the 216.239.59.*'s being non BD it appears that way to me now too. It sure would be nice to see this BD finalize now after 3 months+.
There are two datacenters that I have been watching closely of which are 220.127.116.11 and 18.104.22.168. Either these two datacenters have no filters applied to the results or I am dreaming that Google has fixed all it's problems. None of my sites suffer from SUPPLEMENTAL HELL on these two datacenters. Also I have not yet noticed a single SUPPLEMENT RESULT for any site in the results. I am wondering if this is the new BIG DADDY index with it's 64 bit architecture that we have been hearing about. Sure I've heard 22.214.171.124 is BIG DADDY for a few months now by way of MC's blogs and here at WebmasterWorld but these two datacenters look flawless and shows that supplemental hell is gone.
No change for our "Club" site on these data centres. Definately no fix here.
I am seeing my new pages added to the index on non-BD datcenters within a couple of days of being crawled, but taking 2 weeks or more to be added to the index on BD datacenters.
These DC are what I'm looking closely, I think these are the results which are crawled lately. Please let us know what you think...
How lovely of Google to still fondly remember and rank pages removed nearly three years ago....
Good morning Folks.
Sun...sun and much sun on Copenhagen this shining morning.
Our good friend at the plex Matt "Inigo" Cutts has just posted very interseting BigDaddy weather report:
"Bigdaddy status update: almost there
March 22, 2006 @ 11:55 pm
We’re down to just 1-2 data centers left in the switchover to Bigdaddy. It’s possible that the Bigdaddy switchover will be complete in the next week or two. Just as a reminder, Bigdaddy is a software upgrade to Google’s infrastructure that provides the framework for a lot of improvements to core search quality in the coming months (smarter redirect handling, improved canonicalization, etc.). A team of dedicated people has worked very hard on this change; props to them for the code, sweat, and hours they’ve put into it."
Thanks Inigo..much appreciated.
Having just gone through the list posted by Reseller here [webmasterworld.com...] the only DC range not BD now is (I think) 216.239.59.* .
Which is what I see by default. I'm just hoping that all of my potential customers are not seeing what I'm seeing.
>> A team of dedicated people has worked very hard on this change; props to them for the code, sweat, and hours they’ve put into it. <<
Makes me want to ask Google what they have actually done. They think they have achieved something (exactly what, I have no idea), but all I can see is the same old problems everywhere, problems that have been there for several years, and which Matt Cutts got everyones hopes up for a quick fix back last October-ish. Now, here we are in March and they are saying the fix is almost done, yet everything looks either the same, or much worse than it was.
It beggers belief. Just what are they smoking at the 'plex?
Matt went out of his way to specify that BigDaddy is a software upgrade rather than a hardware upgrade. I wonder if this is in direct response to the 64-bit upgrade rumblings here?
He also mentions that the upgrade is to handle redirects, canonicalization, etc. Wasn't Jagger supposed to solve these problems or am I mistaken?
What do you reckon about the possibility that new software is loaded and ready to go on the existing infrastructure and that over the coming weeks it will be awoken bringing an end to crappy SERPs?
GG denied it had anything to do with 64-bit upgrade in a post here.
>>>>He also mentions that the upgrade is to handle redirects, canonicalization, etc. Wasn't Jagger supposed to solve these problems or am I mistaken?
Yes, but then GG backed down on this claim.
>>>>What do you reckon about the possibility that new software is loaded and ready to go on the existing infrastructure and that over the coming weeks it will be awoken bringing an end to crappy SERPs?
Thats what I hope.
Although MC has always/still talks about Big Daddy infastructure. I would say/hope that the old data (PR, BL, etc) is still used with this new software/infastructure and that new PR, BL etc will be added based on what the new infastructure can do - eg Hopefully crawl destination urls in redirects and identify canonical issues better.
I could be waaay of the bat here though.
March 23, 2006 @ 12:04 am
Good morning Matt
Thanks for update and looking forwards for the new infrastructure.
Just to be sure. Did you say “improved canonicalization” in the coming months?
March 23, 2006 @ 12:12 am
“smarter redirect handling, improved canonicalization”
is there a way to get more technical details?
Matt Cutts Said,
March 23, 2006 @ 12:23 am
Harith, I did. milius, let’s get Bigdaddy out first and then we’ll start to talk about it more in the next few months.
Its starting to sound like Matt feels that the best is yet to come....
Searches for this category is very clean. All the major competitors in our niche market are in the top of the serps with little spam.
As a bonus, we moved up to position 9 from the hundreds.
We were in position 1 thru 4 before Florida and never recovered, until now.
I have a feeling that 126.96.36.199 + .104 has not been factored for off page factors like links. We never played the link game, and have concentrated on on-page factors and quality content, and have suffered as a result.
MLHmptn, do you have a high or low number of incoming links?