Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 126.96.36.199
does anyone know if 188.8.131.52 is being used as a test server?
I seem to see my site at #9 across ALL datacenters excepts for this one which has me fluctuating between #1 and #4.
[edited by: tedster at 11:16 pm (utc) on Oct. 3, 2006]
Today is a sad day for all of us who watch those lovely DCs.
When all Google operators are behaving strange the way they have been doing lately, its rather difficult to watch and measure the developements on the DCs.
Lets hope things will be fixed soon.
Clear your PM box please.
As to the site: operator, I've always found the yahoo one much more accurate, and it orders pages in a much better way too. It's just a shame we have more problems that can only be diagnosed with the google operator.
The site:domain.com search is well and truly broken.
It is now almost totally useless for resolving any canonical or duplicate content issues with your site.
Well done Google!
Yep - I have pretty much given up.
However, I still feel that Google is flitting between something they have been trying to do for months and months and then back to a base score/index etc
With people saying that one month they are top on the site:domain.com search and then disappearing and then reappearing again....
I am thinking it is all g1smd's fault.
g1smd has obviously figured out a good part of how Google works (or has worked up to now) and has been of great help to those of us poor unenlightened folk wandering around in Supplement City, and so now Google is frantically breaking and changing things, because NOBODY IS ALLOWED TO KNOW HOW THINGS WORK!
I haven't looked at many other datacentres today. I usually only look at two or three. Looking randomly, these gfe-bu, gfe-ff, gfe-fk, gfe-hu and gfe-ik also seem OK too.
Just as a reminder; these are the 44 active Google datacentre [webmasterworld.com] URLs, all in gfe-xx.google.com format:
gfe-ag, gfe-ar, gfe-au, gfe-bf, gfe-bp, gfe-bu, gfe-bx, gfe-cw, gfe-dc, gfe-ed, gfe-eh, gfe-ff, gfe-fg, gfe-fk, gfe-gv, gfe-he, gfe-hk, gfe-hs*, gfe-hu, gfe-ik, gfe-in, gfe-jc, gfe-jp, gfe-kc, gfe-kr, gfe-lm, gfe-lo*, gfe-mc, gfe-mu, gfe-nf, gfe-nz, gfe-od, gfe-po, gfe-py, gfe-qb, gfe-rn, gfe-ro, gfe-td, gfe-tw, gfe-ug, gfe-ui*, gfe-va, gfe-wr, gfe-wx, gfe-yo with an unknown name for 184.108.40.206 as yet.
- gfe-ui resolves to the same IP as gfe-hs.
- gfe-lo is not currently active.
- Most gfe-xx names also have more at gfe-xx2 and gfe-xx3 and a very few also at gfe-xx4.google.com too.
"Who needs cloaking when Google's supplemental results will show a title and description for a URL when that URL now has totally different content, and has done so for almost a year? With supplemental results, Google will cloak it for you, as long as the terms aren't too competitive."
It wasn't long after that, that Matt Cutts said that the supplemental refresh cycle would be speeded up. I just wonder what Google is fighting at the moment, for them to have so drastically changed the way things work now.
I see some movements on the new infrastructure DC
A new Data Refresh?
A new Data Push?
Would you be kind to check your testing keywords/ keyphrases and tell us if you see changes in your rankings.
<keyword1 keyword2> - down 2 spots to #7 (recent title change on page may have an impact)
<keyword1 keyword3> - down 6 spots to #12 (recent title change on page may have an impact)
<keyword1 keyword4> - NC, still at #1
<keyword1 keyword5> - new result in at #41 (needs work)
<Sorry, no specific keywords.
See Forum Charter [webmasterworld.com]>
[edited by: tedster at 11:25 pm (utc) on Oct. 8, 2006]
Keyword - was Page 1 No 2 - Now Page 1 No 4
Keyword - was Page 1 No 9 - Now Page 2 No 4
I am not complaining... but WIKI seems to take top positions and that is like giving a dictionary top billing...I wouldn't call it great results but it's not my search engine.
If that is what G wants their results to look like...So be it.
Matt Cutts has posted today a detailed weather report about new infrastructure, PR update etc..
Fall weather forecast [mattcutts.com]
Very interesting indeed.
Thanks Matt. Much appreciated.
It also reverts to an older one, and then sticks there, if you suddenly link to a bad neighbourhood from that page. I wrote about that effect several times before.
site:domain.com - returns all the live "200 OK" pages from the site as normal listings, followed by Supplemental Results for URLs that are now redirecting or are 404. This is much as before.
site:www.domain.com -inurl:www - lists all pages that are Supplemental, those that redirect, those that are 404, and those that are simply "historical supplemental" results. This is much as before, but you MUST try it both with and without the &filter=0 parameter to see what is going on.
This is new (as far as I know):
site:domain.com inurl:foo - lists normal results from the site that include "foo" in the URL, followed by all of the Supplemental Results for any URL on the site that is now a redirect, or is 404, or is a "historical supplemental". That is any Supplemental URL, none of which had "foo" within that URL. That is new to me.
[edited by: g1smd at 12:03 pm (utc) on Oct. 11, 2006]
So it seems that the new infrastructure might take few other months to migrate to all the DCs. Maybe we are talking around the end of 2006.
I.e it has taken more than a year to deploy our good friend BigDaddy.