backlinks have moved to -gv and -cw

[nokama]

I have notice that the backlinks have moved from www to -gv and -cw. I have noticed something strange with backlinks to acrob@t reeder are oddly low on the dc's that seem to be carrying the backlink update:

www 251,000
www2 251,000
www3 251,000
www-ab 251,000
www-cw 2,290
www-dc 251,000
www-ex 251,000
www-fi 251,000
www-gv 2,290
www-in 251,000
www-sj 251,000
www-va 251,000
www-zu 251,000

Looking at site: links, I have noticed something else curious... The 'site:www.g00g1e.com' links seem to be using three distinct indexes:

www 20,000
www2 21,500
www3 21,500
www-ab 21,500
www-cw 20,100
www-dc 19,700
www-ex 21,500
www-fi 21,500
www-gv 19,700
www-in 20,000
www-sj 21,500
www-va 19,700
www-zu 21,500

This phenomenon is not apparent with the other site: links that I have tried. Anyone want to field a guess on what this might mean?

[takagi]

I have notice that the backlinks have moved from www to -gv and -cw.

Nothing is moving from www to -gv or -cw. A search request on www, www2 or www3 is sent to one of the 10 data centers. You can only see a new number of backlinks on www if at least one of the data centers is updated, and your query happens to be redirected to an updated data center. Therefore it is quite the opposite of what you wrote.

As for the "site: links", I don't understand what you wanted to say. It is not possible on Google to combine the search command 'link:' with other commands like 'site:' or even keywords.

[DavidT]

Backlinks I understood were only shown if PR4 or above which seems to be the case with external linking-in pages but not with internal same-site links. Is that correct?

I have internal pages with PR2 showing up in the link:mysite.com command.

[nokama]

you are very right, takagi, I should have spoke 'queries' instead of 'link(s)'. Also, did not mean to say the backlinks move from www, just that it seems like there are some odd things happening with the current backlink index. Thank you for correcting me.

I was trying to point out that it seems strange that the acrob@t links would have dropped 249,000 on -gv and -cw, which is where it seems the latest backlinks are. Am I correct in this assumption?

Also, although all the other site:www.widget.com "www.widget.com" queries I have ran show very different totals across datacenters, the site:www.g!.com "www.g!.com" query seems to indicate that there are three distinct indexes among the datacenters.

I am trying to understand the 'rolling update' issues, and if there might be a bird's-eye view that I am missing. It seems to me that as g! deals in URLs as a commodity, a complete update may be viewed as an 'inventory'. IMO, a business that never takes inventory will go broke. It is my feeling that a major upgrade is in the works, and the april hiccough and subsequent odd 'Esmeralda' rolling updates are part of this. To me, it seems like g! is keeping one lane open on the highway durring construction. Does anyone have thoughts on this to share?

[takagi]

Hi nokama, after rereading my own message, I think I was rather harsh to you. Sorry about that.

To me, it seems like g! is keeping one lane open on the highway durring construction. Does anyone have thoughts on this to share?

To some extend that is right, while the update is going on, Google can still be used. Sometimes using a new lane (updated data center), sometimes on old one. However, most users won't notice there is anything going on (no traffic jam caused by fewer lanes that can be used), and only few visitors will notice the data is fresher just after the update. Especially with update Fritz (last update) because the data seems to be fresher in between the updates anyway.

It certainly is strange the number of backlinks for the download page of Acrobat Reader dropped by more than 99%. Thanks for the interesting fact.