Increase in pages crawled per day
-
What does it mean when GWT abruptly jump from 15k to 30k pages crawled per day?
I am used to see spikes, like 10k average and a couple of time per month 50k pages crawled.
But in this case 10 days ago moved from 15k to 30k per day and it's staying there. I know it's a good sign, the crawler is crawling more pages per day, so it's picking up changes more often, but I have no idea of why is doing it, what good signals usually drive google crawler to choose to increase the number of pages crawled per day?
Anyone knows?
-
Nice find Ryan.
-
Agreed. Especially since Google's own Gary Illyes respond to the following with:
How long is the delay between making it mobile friendly and it being reflected in the search results?
Illyes says “As soon as we discover it is mobile friendly, on a URL by URL basis, it will be updated.
Sounds like when you went responsive they double checked each URL to confirm. From: http://www.thesempost.com/googles-gary-illyes-qa-upcoming-mobile-ranking-signal-change/. Cheers!
-
I usually analyze backlinks with both gwt and ahrefs, and ahrefs also doesn't show any abnormally high DA backlink either.
Agree the responsive change is the most probable candidate, I have a couple of other websites I want to turn responsive before April 21st, that's an opportunity to test and see if that is the reason.
-
Ah, the responsive change could be a big part of it. You're probably getting crawls from the mobile crawler. GWT wouldn't be the best source for the recency on backlinks. I'd actually look for spikes via referrers in Analytics. GWT isn't always that responsive when reporting links. Still, it looks like the responsive redesign is a likely candidate for this, especially with Google's looming April 21st deadline.
-
Tw things I forgot to mention are:
- something like 2 weeks ago we turned the website responsive, could it be google mobile crawler is increasing the number of crawled pages, I have to analyze the logs to see if the requests are coming from google mobile crawler
- the total number of indexed pages didn't change, which make me wonder if a rise in the number of crawled pages per day is all that relevant
-
Hi Ryan,
- GWT (Search Traffic->Search Queries) shows a drop of 6% in impressions for brand based searches (google trends shows a similar pattern).
- GWT is not showing any recent backlink with an abnormally high DA.
- we actually had a couple of unusually high traffic from Facebook thanks to a couple of particularly successful post, but we are talking about a couple of spikes of just 5k visits and they both started after the rise of pages crawled per day.
If you have any other idea it's more than welcome, I wish I could understand the source of that change to be able to replicate it on other websites.
-
I am not sure I understand what you mean, that website has a total of 35k pages submitted through sitemap to GWT, of which only 8k are indexed. The total number of pages indexed have always been slowly increasing through time, it moved from 6k to 8k in the last couple of months, slowly with no spikes.
That's not the total number of pages served by the site, since dynamics search results page amount to around 150k total pages, we do not submit all of them in the sitemap on purpose, and GWT shows 70k pages as the total number of indexed pages.
I analyzed Google crawler activity through server logs in the past, it does pick a set of (apparently) random pages every night and does crawl them. I actually never analyzed what percentage of those pages are in the sitemap or not.
Internal link structure was built on purpose to try to favor ranking of pages we considered more important.
The point is we didn't change anything in the website structure recently. User generated content have been lowering duplicate pages count, slowly, through time, without any recent spike. We have a PR campaign which is increasing backlinks with an average rate of around 3 links per week, and we didn't have any high DA backlinks appearing in the last few weeks.
So I am wondering what made google crawler start crawling much more pages per day.
-
yes, I updated to parameters just before you posted
-
When you say URL variables do you mean query string variables like ?key=value
That is really good advice. You can check in your GWT. If you let google crawl and it runs in to a loop it will not index that section of your site. It would be costly for them.
-
I would also check you have not got a spike of URL parameters becoming available. I recently had a similar issue and although I had these set up in GWT the crawler was actively wasting its time on them. Once I added to robots the crawl level went back to 'normal'.
-
There could be several factors... maybe your brand based search is prompting Google to capture more of your site. Maybe you got a link from a very high authority site that prompts higher crawl volumes. Queries that prompt freshness related to your site could also spur on Google. It is a lot of guesswork, but can be whittled down some by a close look at Analytics and perhaps tomorrows OSE update (Fresh Web Explorer might provide some clue's in the meantime.) At least you're moving in the right direction. Cheers!
-
There are two variables in play and you are picking up on one.
If there are 1,000 pages on your website then Google may index all 1,000 if they are aware of all the pages. As you indicated, it is also Google's decision how many of your pages to index.
The second factor which is most likely the case in your situation is that Google only has two ways to index your pages. One is to submit a sitemap in GWT to all of your known pages. So Google would then have a choice to index all 1,000 as it would then be aware of their existence. However, it sounds like your website is relying on links. If you have 1,000 pages and a home page with one link leading to an about us page then Google is only aware of two pages on your entire website. Your website has to have a internal link structure that Google can crawl.
Imagine your website like a tree root structure. For Google to get to every page and index it then it has to have clear, defined, and easy access. Websites with a home page that links to a page A that then links to page B that then links to page C that then links to page D that then links to 500 pages can easily lose 500 pages if there is an obstruction between any of the pages that lead to page D. Because google can't crawl to page D to see all the pages on it.
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
-
Overdynamic Pages - How to Solve it?
Hi everyone, I'm running a classified real estate ads site, where people can publish their apartment or house they want to sell, so we use multiple filters to help people find what they want. Lately we added multiple filters to the URL to make the search more precise, things like: Prices (priceAmount=###) Bedrooms (BedroomsNumber=2) Bathrooms (BathroomsNumber=3) TotalArea (totalArea=1_50) Services (Elevator, CommonAreas, security) Among other Filters so you see the picture, all this filters are on the URL so that people can share their search on multiple social media, that makes two problems for moz crawl: Overdynamic URLs Too long URLs Now what would be a good solution for this 2 problems, would a canonical to the original page before the "?" would be ok? Example:
Technical SEO | | JoaoCJ
http://urbania.pe/buscar/venta-de-propiedades?bathroomsNumber=2&services=gas&commonAreas=solarium The problem I have with this solution is that I also have a pagination parameter (page=2), and I'm using prev and next tags, if I use a such canonical will break the prev and next tag? http://urbania.pe/buscar/venta-de-propiedades?bathroomsNumber=2&services=gas&commonAreas=solarium&page=2 Also thinking if adding a noindex on pages with paramters could also be an option. Thanks a lot, I'm trying to address this issues.0 -
Issue with Cached pages
I have a client who has a three domains:
Technical SEO | | paulbaguley
budgetkits.co.uk
prosocceruk.co.uk
cheapfootballkits.co.uk Budget Kits is not active but Pro Soccer and Cheap Football Kits are. The issue is when you do site:budgetkits.co.uk on Google it brings back results. If you click on the link it goes to page saying website doesn't exist which is correct but if you click on cached it shows you a page from prosocceruk.co.uk or cheapfootballkits.co.uk. The cached pages are very recent by a couple of days ago to a week. The first result brings up www.budgetkits.co.uk/rainwear but the cached page is www.prosocceruk.co.uk/rainwear The third result brings up www.budgetkits.co.uk/kids-football-kits but the cached page is http://www.cheapfootballkits.co.uk The history of this issue is that budgetkits.co.uk was its own website 7 years ago and then it used to point at prosocceruk.co.uk after that but it no longer does for about two months. All files have been deleted from budgetkits.co.uk so it is just a domain. Any help with this would be very much appreciated as I have not seen this kind of issue before.0 -
Can I canonical the same page?
I have a site where I have 500+ Page listing pages and I would like to rel=canonical them to the master page. Example: http://www.example.com//articles?p=18 OR http://www.example.com/articles?p=65 I plan on adding this to the section from of the page template so it goes to all pages - When I do this, I will also add the canonical to the page I am directing the canonical. Is this a bad thing? Or allowed?
Technical SEO | | JoshKimber0 -
Should I change my targeted page?
Currently I have a site where the targeted keywords were on the home page, with links built to the homepage. It has been widely recognised though that Google is looking more and more for specific content on webpages that holds greater relevance to search queries. As such, I switched this targeted page to other created webpages - changing metatags and creating more relevant content for respective keywords. I thought this would improve rankings, however, upon doing this there was a sharp fall in rankings for keywords. Is there anything that I could have done wrong, or can do better so that keywords move back up the rankings?
Technical SEO | | Gavo0 -
Fixing Crawl Errors
Hi! I moved my Wordpress blog back in August, and lost much of my site traffic. I recently found over 1000 crawl errors in Webmaster Tools because some of my redirects weren't transferred, so we are working on fixing the errors and letting Google know. I'm wondering how long I should expect for Google to recognize that the errors have been fixed and for the traffic to start returning? Thanks! Jodi - momsfavoritestuff.com
Technical SEO | | JodiFTM0 -
I am trying to correct error report of duplicate page content. However I am unable to find in over 100 blogs the page which contains similar content to the page SEOmoz reported as having similar content is my only option to just dlete the blog page?
I am trying to correct duplicate content. However SEOmoz only reports and shows the page of duplicate content. I have 5 years worth of blogs and cannot find the duplicate page. Is my only option to just delete the page to improve my rankings. Brooke
Technical SEO | | wianno1680 -
SEOMoz is indicating I have 40 pages with duplicate content, yet it doesn't list the URL's of the pages???
When I look at the Errors and Warnings on my Campaign Overview, I have a lot of "duplicate content" errors. When I view the errors/warnings SEOMoz indicates the number of pages with duplicate content, yet when I go to view them the subsequent page says no pages were found... Any ideas are greatly welcomed! Thanks Marty K.
Technical SEO | | MartinKlausmeier0 -
How far into a page will a spider crawl to look for text?
How far into a page will a spider crawl to look for text? I've heard a spider will only crawl the first 3kb, but can't find an authoritative source for that information.
Technical SEO | | crvw0