Forum Moderators: Robert Charlton & goodroi
Reseller,
Having looked at these dc's in some detail, I have to disagree with you (tho glad you're making a comback!).
Because of major changes to a site I have in the OCT-FEB period, I can pinpoint the vintage of the index quite easily (and confirm the site specific results with others I am familiar with). What I see on these dc's is an index made up of ancient results (circa AUG 2005) with some additions from FEB or so.
If this truly is the result of the carnage of the switch to BD then Google has accomplished nothing in the FEB-15 to current timeframe.
If as you say, Google knows exactly what they're doing, what they are apparently trying to achieve is to augment the AUG-05 index with a few new pages. If you mean Google intended to "break down" the entire index and rebuild it "live" - unlike in the past where more or less finished updates rolled onto all dc's over a 5-7 day period - then I might agree. What I can't see is the reseller frindly ® dc's being anything but yet another interim step. The difference is, I see the process as scambling to try and fix an unanticipated scru-up, you see it as an deliberate plan.
Either way, I'm counting the days until Microsoft rolls out their new product as Google is ripe for the taking ... takes awhile for the public to turn against a SE but there certianly is precedent (remember when you couldn't turn on your TV without seeing ads for Lycos?).
From a webmaster point of view, the ideal world is MSN, Google, Yahoo with 30% market share each.
[edited by: tedster at 10:32 pm (utc) on April 6, 2006]
Watch out for that!
Also try the effects of adding both &num=100 and &filter=0 on the end of the Google search URL, too.
If I hit refresh on a static IP I often get a different set of results the second time.
Watch out for that!
Also try the effects of adding both &num=100 and &filter=0 on the end of the Google search URL, too.
SICK! In a few searches I did the first 50 results were dominated by a single domain...No indented MORE FROM THIS SITE. I believe this is showing me the importance of ALLINTEXT and how ALLINANCHOR importance is certainly being devalued.
And also, what is going on with internal pages having higher PR now on so many sites? Is Google devaluing links to homepages now? If I was only a Google techie that knew their algo! :>~
Across the board drops on all DCs overnight. Biggest change showing from:
64.233.183.99
64.233.183.104
both are showing 45% drops in pages indexed for the same site that I have been talking about last 2 days.
Other DCs showing minimal change.
Apart from the differences in # of pages indexed, I am noticing that the DC with the lesser indexed page count almost always shows a pages' meta description as the result description. Whereas the DCs with higher indexed page counts almost always show on page text for the description.
Seems to me that the DCs are acting as an "assembly line" of sorts, all working together processing all of the inbound spider data.
I need to add that the aforementioned was noted using site:mydomain.com queries.
Good evening Folks
Easter Holidays is good time to do some tweaking, apply filters or even to deploy new algos. Not only to enjoy few Happy Meals in addition to generous portions of Organic Bacon Polenta as Matt Inigo Cutts has been practicing recent years :-)
In fact signs of serps pollution on the new infrastructure started exactly on 9th April 2006
msg #:68
[webmasterworld.com...]
However, I have noticed today on several "friendly" DCs that irrelevant sites have been removed of top 10 when run my testing search query. So I see today some Happy Serps on the following DCs, for example
[64.233.171.99...]
[64.233.171.104...]
[64.233.185.99...]
[64.233.185.104...]
[72.14.203.99...]
[72.14.203.104...]
[216.239.37.99...]
[216.239.37.104...]
Of course, you might see something quite different for your own search query ;-)
[edited by: reseller at 7:27 pm (utc) on April 12, 2006]
Try searching for an email address on any other datacentre, and then try it again there... wierd.
"What is going on at [72.14.207.99...] then?"
Business as usual, I guess. That DC is still behaving odd ;-)
I recall that it was you who noticed it first and reported it also on Matt's blog.
Do you mind me calling that DC from now on:
g1smd's DC :-)
Take a look at what I was saying in msg # 106 ...
I just took another look at my site, and am seeing strange results as well ... But then again, I noticed something else ... All of the indexed pages listed on 72.14.207.99 are using the the meta description tag from the page for the result description; no on page text ... While the other DCs utilize on page text for the description ...
Something I am starting to see (between DC watching, and reviewing my site logs) is a direct correlation between:
1. The # of pages that have already been spidered
2. The pages that are in the index (bringing in traffic)
3. The pages that have been spidered, but not yet in index.
What I mean by correlation is that if I take:
A. One of the DCs with the highest page count
B. 2 DCs with the lowest page counts
Add both DCs (B) together; that number equals the count on the DC with the highest page count (A). In other words, B1 + B2 = A
I have been watching this trend for the past few days. I also have been seeing several other things, which I will post when I have more concrete numbers.
