Subscribe: Comments on: Cat post: Life’s getting better!
http://sebastians-pamphlets.com/cat-post-life-is-getting-better/feed/
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
Tags:
google  index  indexes  main index  main  pages  results  sebastian  similar  supplemental index  supplemental results  supplemental 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Comments on: Cat post: Life’s getting better!

Comments on: Cat post: Life’s getting better!



If you've read my articles somewhere on the Internet, expect something different here.



Published: Mon, 20 Nov 2017 15:20:15 +0000

 



By: Sebastian

Thu, 11 Oct 2007 07:59:06 +0000

Thanks Marc. ;) I still have all pages which deserve it in the main index. Nearly all pages from this blog which populate the supplemental index are old posts with next to no inbound links, and archives. Tiered search indexes are not a bad thing in general. Try to see it the other way round: without tiered indexes you'd lose a shitload of SE traffic from all major engines, because they would feed the main index only, within its physical limits, and ignore the lesser important pages (remember the old Altavista for example where unsubmitted and more or less unlinked pages simply phased out). Of course it would be nice when all engines cache the whole Web in their main indexes, but that would mean more competition, and less working methods (respectively more SEO efforts necessary) to promote particular pages. I can handle the different indexes quite well, and I'm preparing my methods for expected changes (growing main indexes and maybe even decreasing secondary indexes over time).



By: NY SEO

Wed, 10 Oct 2007 20:57:56 +0000

Greetings fellow Google Basher, 80% supplemental? That confounded Google Algo needs some work! Especially since they are toying with the fabric of the web with the whole link snitching fiasco. There are several priceless posts here! So 80% supp has to be temporary, hopefully due to your migration. Well, you have a handful social bookmarks & votes from me, and I imagine many others will find your information useful as well. Install the "share this" plug-in and the links should be rolling in. Thanks for sharing your expertise dude.



By: Sebastian

Sat, 15 Sep 2007 15:42:12 +0000

Clint, your search using the filter=0 parameter shows similar pages, not supplemental pages. Not all similar pages live in the supp index, some live in both. As for the Matt bait at Sphinn ... of course he didn't reveal anything, his post just inspired me to play with time limited searches.



By: Clint Dixon

Sat, 15 Sep 2007 15:22:24 +0000

Supplemental Results did not go away nor will they. This second index (supplemental) has been around since Google started, originally there was a main and forward index I believe. The main index would be what is known now as the Supplemental Index its where all webpages go. The forward index is where pages that are likely to be returned for a users query go and why google can return results in nano-seconds. I explain how to find if any site is in the supplemental results in under 60 seconds http://www.mediaviper.com/ Peace!



By: Sebastian

Sat, 15 Sep 2007 08:33:58 +0000

Matt said it makes no sense to show the supplemental status to end users any more. One can read that as "we ignore supp obsessed SEOs". We'll see.



By: Richard Hearne

Sat, 15 Sep 2007 07:58:22 +0000

So Matt's comment over on Sphinn that he didn't mind if someone found a backdoor to supps might also mean 'I don't mind, but we're still going to close this'...



By: Sebastian

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:36:19 +0000

Richard, I've resubmitted the query and noticed that Google has read my post and accomodated the number of pages in the main index to 90 accordingly. ;)



By: Richard Hearne

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 21:18:22 +0000

All I can say is I hope this isn't real... I get 'In order to show you the most relevant results, we have omitted some entries very similar to the 3 already displayed.' for one site... *sigh* Testing my own site I get 275 from 396 which sounds completely plausible. Nice find Sebastian



By: Hugo Guzman

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:13:41 +0000

LOL...damn, now I'm confused. Am I looking at the wrong thing? Let me read through your post again and see if I'm missing something.



By: Sebastian

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:09:46 +0000

Perhaps I'm confused, but filtered similar results and supplemental results is not the same. Pages which are *only* in the supplemental index shouldn't come up for quoted searches like ["He couldn't kick anything beyond an extra point or chip-shot, and it came back to bite the Jaguars in the end"].