Host sitemaps on S3?
-
Hey guys,
I run a dynamic web service and I will start building static sitemaps for it pretty soon. The fact that my app lives in a multitude of servers doesn't make it easy to distribute frequently updated static files throughout the servers.
My idea was to host the files in AWS S3 and point my robots.txt sitemap directive there. I'll use a sitemap index so, every other sitemap will be hosted on S3 as well.
I could dynamically mirror the content from the files in S3 through my app, but that would be a little more resource intensive than just serving the static files from a common place.
Any ideas? Thanks!
-
My general take on this sort of scenario is first to eliminate all the redundant hostnames with round-robin DNS, through adding extra server power with software-based load-balancing in the interim with a solution like InterWorx, and breaking out database servers. If you do that, you should have a nice little server cluster that's crazy efficient.and scalable. You can add a CDN to the mix if you like as well. With all of that, SEO should work the same way as on a single server.
Sitemaps can then be generated dynamically really easily (in under 25 lines of code, most of the time).
If you just want a way to mirror static files, you'll want to look at rsync.
And finally, as for S3, my personal opinion is to stay away. I'm an SEO, but I also spent 7 years building a hosting company. Those solutions sound great in their marketing, but are scientifically less reliable than standard hosting, and you can verify that via public uptime tracking sites like HyperSpin.
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
XML sitemap and rel alternate hreflang requirements for Google Shopping
Our company implemented Google Shopping for our site for multiple countries, currencies and languages. Every combination of language and country is accessible via a url path and for all site pages, not just the pages with products for sale. I was not part of the project. We support 18 languages and 14 shop countries. When the project was finished we had a total of 240 language/country combinations listed in our rel alternate hreflang tags for every page and 240 language/country combinations in our XML sitemap for each page and canonicals are unique for every one of these page. My concern is with duplicate content. Also I can see odd language/country url combinations (like a country with a language spoken by a very low percentage of people in that country) are being crawled, indexed, and appearing in serps. This uses up my crawl budget for pages I don't care about. I don't this it is wise to disallow urls in robots.txt for that we are simultaneously listing in the XML sitemap. Is it true that these are requirements for Google Shopping to have XML sitemap and rel alternate hreflang for every language/country combination?
Technical SEO | | awilliams_kingston0 -
Switching host
Hi guys, some questions about host switching. Actually my blog is hosted on siteground growbig Plan. I was thinking about upgrading to gogeek Plan (their PRO shared hosting). Do you think that better technologies and server speed response can improve My ranking? Another question: if I switch server they will change ip. Does it affect My SEO negatively? And after the switch and ip changing Is too much if I re-change ip buying a dedicated ip? Will I risk to hurt My Raking? Sorry For my foreign english 🙂 Thanks so much!
Technical SEO | | Italianseolover0 -
302 redirect used, submit old sitemap?
The website of a partner of mine was recently migrated to a new platform. Even though the content on the pages mostly stayed the same, both the HTML source (divs, meta data, headers, etc.) and URLs (removed index.php, removed capitalization, etc) changed heavily. Unfortunately, the URLs of ALL forum posts (150K+) were redirected using a 302 redirect, which was only recently discovered and swiftly changed to a 301 after the discovery. Several other important content pages (150+) weren't redirected at all at first, but most now have a 301 redirect as well. The 302 redirects and 404 content pages had been live for over 2 weeks at that point, and judging by the consistent day/day drop in organic traffic, I'm guessing Google didn't like the way this migration went. My best guess would be that Google is currently treating all these content pages as 'new' (after all, the source code changed 50%+, most of the meta data changed, the URL changed, and a 302 redirect was used). On top of that, the large number of 404's they've encountered (40K+) probably also fueled their belief of a now non-worthy-of-traffic website. Given that some of these pages had been online for almost a decade, I would love Google to see that these pages are actually new versions of the old page, and therefore pass on any link juice & authority. I had the idea of submitting a sitemap containing the most important URLs of the old website (as harvested from the Top Visited Pages from Google Analytics, because no old sitemap was ever generated...), thereby re-pointing Google to all these old pages, but presenting them with a nice 301 redirect this time instead, hopefully causing them to regain their rankings. To your best knowledge, would that help the problems I've outlined above? Could it hurt? Any other tips are welcome as well.
Technical SEO | | Theo-NL0 -
XML Sitemap Issue or not?
Hi Everyone, I submitted a sitemap within the google webmaster tools and I had a warning message of 38 issues. Issue: Url blocked by robots.txt. Description: Sitemap contains urls which are blocked by robots.txt. Example: the ones that were given were urls that we don't want them to be indexed: Sitemap: www.example.org/author.xml Value: http://www.example.org/author/admin/ My issue here is that the number of URL indexed is pretty low and I know for a fact that Robot.txt aren't good especially if they block URL that needs to be indexed. Apparently the URLs that are blocked seem to be URLs that we don't to be indexed but it doesn't display all URLs that are blocked. Do you think i m having a major problem or everything is fine?What should I do? How can I fix it? FYI: Wordpress is what we use for our website Thanks
Technical SEO | | Tay19860 -
Sitemaps
Hi, I have doubt using sitemaps My web page is a news we page and we have thousands of articles in every section. For example we have an area that is called technology We have articles since 1999!! So the question is how can Make googl robot index them? Months ago when you enter the section technology we used to have a paginator without limits, but we notice that this query consume a lot of CPU per user every time was clicked. So we decide to limit to 10 pages with 1 records. Now it works great BUT I can see in google webmaster tools that our index decreased dramatically The answer is very easy, the bot doesn't have a way to get older technoly news articles because we limit he query to 150 records total Well, the Questin is how can I fix this? Options: 1) leave the query without limits 2) create a new button " all tech news" with a different query without a limit but paginated with (for example) 200 records each page 3) Create a sitemap that contain all the tech articles Any idea? Really thanks.
Technical SEO | | informatica8100 -
Partial mobile sitemap
Hi, We have a main www website with a standard sitemap. We also have a m. site for mobile content (but m. is only for our top pages and doesn't include the entire site). If a mobile client accesses one of our www pages we redirect to the m. page. If we don't have a m. version we keep them on the www site. Currently we block robots from the mobile site. Since our m. site only contains the top pages, I'm trying to determine the boost we might get from creating a mobile sitemap. I don't want to create the "partial" mobile sitemap and somehow have it hurt our traffic. Here is my plan update m. pages to point rel canonical to appropriate www page (makes sure we don't dilute SEO across m. and www.) create mobile sitemap and allow all robots to access site. Our www pages already rank fairly highly so just want to verify if there are any concerns since m. is not a complete version of www?
Technical SEO | | NicB10 -
Video Sitemaps - Clarification Needed
I'm trying to make sense of video sitemaps so I can get one up and going but the set up seems unclear. We currently have 7 videos created and up on Youtube. I've got them embedded on the site to a "Video" landing page as well as having these product demo videos embedded on appropriate product detail pages. So when setting up the video sitemap it looks like I'll be using the video:player_loctag as opposed to video:content_locbecause I'm not linking to the file itself but rather a page it's hosted on. Correct? Additionally I'm adding the product detail page url here, not Youtube right? Lastly, do I need to insert an autoplay piece on the videos on the product detail page? I feel that would be an annoying user experience.</video:content_loc></video:player_loc> So part of my sitemap might look like this... <video:player_loc allow_embed="yes" autoplay="ap=[?]">http://website/ProductDetailURL</video:player_loc>
Technical SEO | | dgmiles0 -
If non-paying customers only get a 2 min snippet of a video, can my video length in sitemap.xml be the full length?
I am working on a website that all of its primary contents are videos. They have an assortment of free videos, but the majority or viewable only with a subscription to the site. If you don't have a subscription, you can see a 2 min video clip of the contents of the video. But all the videos can be anywhere from 10min to 1.5 hours. When I am auto-generating the sitemap.xml, can I put the full length of the videos for paying members in the XML in the video:duration property? Or because publicly only 2 minutes is available (unless you pay for a membership) is that frowned upon?
Technical SEO | | nbyloff0