Stecyk
09-18-2005, 03:37 PM
Hi Folks,
I think I might have made more sense out of Google's prior response where Google indicated that someone had linked to my RSS feed and that was why it was scanning it frequently.
From my server logs today, I see that Google has a new "Feedfetcher-Google; +http://www.google.com/feedfetcher.html)".
If we follow the link, we learn that:
Feedfetcher is how Google grabs RSS or Atom feeds when users choose to add them to their Google homepage. Feedfetcher collects and periodically refreshes these user-initiated feeds, but does not index them in Blog Search or Google's other search services (feeds only appear in our search results if they've been crawled by Googlebot). Find answers below to some of the most commonly asked questions about how this user-controlled feed grabber works.
Okay, so that explains the link to my RSS feed. Some(one) have added my RSS to their Google homepage. Okay fine.
As we continue reading Google's information, we learn that:
Feedfetcher shouldn't retrieve feeds from most sites more than once every hour on average. Some frequently updated sites may be refreshed more often. Note, however, that due to network delays, it's possible that Feedfetcher may briefly appear to retrieve your feeds more frequently.
So far today, Google has resumed its RSS updates from my site and its frequency is about 4 times per hour, almost to the minute. This frequency is a bit higher than its stated policy.
I began to write Google another polite e-mail asking them to turn down the frequency, but I held off. Given that I had just corresponded with them last week and we didn't come to full understanding and mutual solution, I am reluctant to go back again so quickly. If given a choice between no Google and an overactive Google, I chose the overactive Google.
And I am thinking I can't be the only one. Perhaps they are fine tuning their system and will resolve this issue shortly?
Anyone have any thoughts. Georgeek, you seem to have your fingers in the search world, so I would appreciate getting your thoughts on this matter. Everyone else is encouraged to participate as well.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Best regards,
Kevin
I think I might have made more sense out of Google's prior response where Google indicated that someone had linked to my RSS feed and that was why it was scanning it frequently.
From my server logs today, I see that Google has a new "Feedfetcher-Google; +http://www.google.com/feedfetcher.html)".
If we follow the link, we learn that:
Feedfetcher is how Google grabs RSS or Atom feeds when users choose to add them to their Google homepage. Feedfetcher collects and periodically refreshes these user-initiated feeds, but does not index them in Blog Search or Google's other search services (feeds only appear in our search results if they've been crawled by Googlebot). Find answers below to some of the most commonly asked questions about how this user-controlled feed grabber works.
Okay, so that explains the link to my RSS feed. Some(one) have added my RSS to their Google homepage. Okay fine.
As we continue reading Google's information, we learn that:
Feedfetcher shouldn't retrieve feeds from most sites more than once every hour on average. Some frequently updated sites may be refreshed more often. Note, however, that due to network delays, it's possible that Feedfetcher may briefly appear to retrieve your feeds more frequently.
So far today, Google has resumed its RSS updates from my site and its frequency is about 4 times per hour, almost to the minute. This frequency is a bit higher than its stated policy.
I began to write Google another polite e-mail asking them to turn down the frequency, but I held off. Given that I had just corresponded with them last week and we didn't come to full understanding and mutual solution, I am reluctant to go back again so quickly. If given a choice between no Google and an overactive Google, I chose the overactive Google.
And I am thinking I can't be the only one. Perhaps they are fine tuning their system and will resolve this issue shortly?
Anyone have any thoughts. Georgeek, you seem to have your fingers in the search world, so I would appreciate getting your thoughts on this matter. Everyone else is encouraged to participate as well.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Best regards,
Kevin