How do I "leverage browser caching"
-
Google is telling me to "leverage browser caching" and put a freshness factor of 1 week on images used on my site. http://www.1stclassdriving.co.uk.
Try as i may I cannot find out how to do this.I'm running two sites - http://www.1stclassdriving.co.uk. on a shared hosting package with Easyspace and http://www.croydondrivingschool.co.uk with Fasthosts, both under windows with asp scripting.
Can anyone point me to any tutorials or guide me as to how I do this please
-
Hi
To Leverage browser caching speeds up your site as it will only cause common resources to be loaded once rather than every time you load a page on your site or revisit the site. In order to leverage browser caching I would suggest editing your web.config file if you are on an IIS server or in the .htaccess file if you are on an Apache server. Both of these will involve you making an entry into either of these files and shouldn't require your hosting company. I regularly work with both, but in particular Apache servers and I often drop the standard code in to leverage this and speed the site up. One other noticeable speed enhancement I would recommend is gzip compression which can be carried out in a similar manner. If you have anymore questions about any of this don't hesitate to give me a shout on here
-
Dear Matt,
I don't get it...
Is the answer in the programming of the site (for example through the web.config) or something to do in the IIS (which means the hosting company should do it...?) ?
Also, caching only helps the second time the same user loads the page doesn't it?
THanks
-
Glad I could help Brian and welcome to the community, by the way
-
Brilliant - works fine - many thanx Matt
-
Hi Brian
I think you might find this helpful - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6634302/how-to-leverage-browser-caching-at-asp-net-iis-7-5
and...
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/642954/iis7-cache-control
You should be able to do this by making/editing (if you already have one) a web.config file in your root folder, which is explained in the article above.
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
-
Tracking down rel="canonical" on Wordpress site
A rel="canonical" is being added to every page and post on my Wordpress site - not tag results, not category results. Not a major problem, right? Except that I don't know where it's coming from. I've tried tracking it down - change the theme back to a default one, turn off all the plugins - it's still there. Is it coming from .htaccess perhaps? The only issue it is causing is that it has causes me to have to turn off the canonical option in Platinum SEO as that was resulting in two identical rel=canon on each page. It doesn't seem to be causing problem but I'd like to get a better understanding of what it going on.
On-Page Optimization | | robandsarahgillespie0 -
When you think of Firefox, do you think of a browser?
I do. Firefox is a browser. Mozilla's website is quite authoritative and gets a lot of traffic. Firefox is a browser and has been for a very long time. What might be preventing en-US content about Firefox from appearing in en-US search for "browser"? https://www.google.com/search?q=browser&lr=lang_en&pws=0 Results for that search includes such things as... The Blackboard browser checker utility page:https://help.blackboard.com/Learn/Student/Getting_Started/Browser_Support/Browser_Checker The Ensembl genome browser page:http://grch37.ensembl.org/index.html Dozens of pages for things that aren't browsers but just happen to use the word "browser" in their URL or content Pages for any number of web browsers, including almost every web browser you can imagine except Firefox If you force results in other languages, Firefox shows up (it was #7 in Danish SERP when I typed this): https://www.google.com/search?q=browser&pws=0&lr=lang_da If you do a site-specific search, plenty of Firefox pages rank: https://www.google.com/search?lr=lang_en&pws=0&q=browser+site%3Amozilla.org The en-US site continues to rank well for all sorts of other unbranded terms that include the word "browser" -- it's in the top 5 for "private browser" and "fast browser". The attached image shows what "browser" searches that produced en-US results looks like in webmaster tools. There are dots where the site appears in the top 20 (which is probably its appropriate ranking) and then it immediately disappears. There are short lines where a new page on the site starts to rank for "browser" (as in the case ofFirefox Focus), and then those disappear too. Is the en-US Firefox site being penalized for some reason on this keyword? Does anyone see some obvious misconfiguration causing it to fall out of rankings? Thanks. wE0Bn
On-Page Optimization | | hoosteeno0 -
How to handle "app" pages.
Hey guys, We've got an app - a drag & drop email builder - and we are looking to improve our seo efforts. That being said - we're not sure how to treat pages of the app that wouldn't tell google nothing at all basically (loads of duplicate content, lorem ipsum, etc). They're pages that are used by the clients to build their own templates ex: builder pages they are extremely useful for our clients, but GGL wouldn't prolly make too much sense out of them. That being said - rather randomly, before we nofollow noindexed them, some of them started ranking (probably given to the really great analytics data we have on them. Loads of clients, loads of time spent on page, etc). Can we harness them in a better way, or just nofollownoindex them? I don't really see how they can be "canonicalised" since they don't really provide any quality content for Google. Much like MOZ's keyword explorer tool for ex. Mucho quality for us - but not a google fan favorite content-wise. Thanks for your help 🙂
On-Page Optimization | | andy.bigbangthemes0 -
Ranking for "synonym" terms on separate pages?
(My title says "synonym" but it's not exactly the most accurate word, but works best for the title_) I have a site that ranks #1 for a term, and let’s pretend it’s “cheap phone”. It’s also ranks #1 for “cheap phone service” and #3 for “cheap phone plans”. These are all the home page with those rankings I have a sub page whose natural title would be “Cheap Phone Plans” or “Cheap Phone Service”. I have it named something these and it is not optimized for either of these terms because I think it would be best to not mess with the good rankings I have already for those two terms So here’s my question: what would likely be the outcome if I optimized that subpage for “Cheap Phone Plans” or “Cheap Phone Service”? If Google began to direct searchers of this term to my subpage rather than my home page, would my home page lose some of it’s ranking with it’s main and most popular keyword, “cheap phone? Thanks!
On-Page Optimization | | bizzer0 -
Rel="canonical" link should they be to or from an "SEO friendly" url
Thanks for taking the time to review this. So for our example, lets use the following SEO friendly link: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/pacific-christian-college-of-ministry-and-biblical-studies/BA-biblical-studies We'll call this link the SEO VERSION The title of the college is" Pacific Christian College of Minstry and Biblical Studies" The title of the program is "BA Biblical Studies" The QUERY version of the link to this page would be something like: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/index.php?collegeid=22&programid=34 Keep in mind that the meta title, description, and keyword tags for the page are all administerable The SEO VERSION is automatically created from the title of the college, and the title of the program. Each one of these titles can be overidden with a URL slug individually. For instance, the admin could make the link: http://hiu.calibermediagroup.com/undergraduate-on-campus/academics/colleges/pacific-christian-college-of-ministry/biblical-studies by changing the slug for the college to "pacific-christian-college-of-ministry" and the slug for the program to "biblical-studies". Let's call this version the SLUG VERSION So now we have multiple ways to get to the same content. The question on the table is what is best practice for the rel="canonical" link to keep from getting dinged for duplicate content. Let's say that our SEO VERSION is the canonical link for 1 year. Then the choice was made to optimize the links thru the slugs creating the SLUG VERSION. My assumption is that we would keep the SEO VERSION as the canonical link. But then let's say 6 months later that the title of the program is changed in the admin. Now the SEO VERSION has changed and so has the canonical link. Do we lose the link juice garnered over the last 18 months? It would seem to me, that if we use the QUERY version as the canonical link, then any optimizations or changes affect everything except the canonical link, thus keeping the previous link juice earned. But is having an ugly URL as the canonical link detrimental to SEO? Please advise.
On-Page Optimization | | robertdonnell0 -
Replacing "_" with "-" in url, results in new url?
We ran SEOmoz's "On-Page Optimization" tool on a url which contains the character "_". According to the tool: "Characters which are less commonly used in URLs may cause problems with accessibility, interpretation and ranking in search engines. It is considered a best practice to stick to standard URL structures to avoid potential problems." "Rewrite the URL to contain only standard characters." Therefore we will rewrite the url, replacing "_" with "-". Will search engines consider the "-" url a different one? Do we need to 301 the old url to the new one? Thanks for your help!
On-Page Optimization | | gerardoH0 -
What image attribute should carry "anchor text" for internal linking
Newbie question: an internal link generally should carry keyword anchor text, so if the link is actually an image, what image attribute should contain the equivalent of the anchor text
On-Page Optimization | | k3nn3dy30 -
Will a "no follow" "no index" meta tag resolve duplicate content issue?
I have a duplicate content issue. If the page has already been indexed will a no follow no index tag resolve the issue or do I also need a rel canonical statement?
On-Page Optimization | | McKeeMarketing0