IIS Server Load for 500 Page Level 301 Redirects
-
We are migrating content from 10 sub domains to our www site. On an IIS sever, what is potential server load impact, if any, for setting up 500 plus page level redirects?
-
Thanks for the HTTP status code analogy. The comment adds the perspective I need to explain this to my technical manager.
-
Very minimal. A 301 redirect is delivered via an HTTP status code which is the first thing to get crawled on a page. there won't be any other server load other than sending it along it's way to it's new location.
Edit: To put this in other words, it's not going to be any worse than your IIS server having to deliver an additional 500 plus HTTP status code 200.
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
-
Buying a domain to 301 redirect for increased rankings
A large competitor has recently purchased a large marketing company that specializes in their industry. As a part of this acquisition they obtained ownership of www.digitalsherpa.com, which is now 301 redirecting some 50K links to www.costar.com/. When I did a site:www.digitalsherpa.com search all of the origin URLs had title tags from the costar site in place of their own. My question is: Does this violate Google spam guidelines? search?sourceid=chrome-psyapi2&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8&q=site%3Adigitalsherpa.com&oq=site&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j69i65j69i60j0l2.1919j0j7
Technical SEO | | Reis_Inc.0 -
Virtual inlcude v.s. Redirect 301
Hi there, I manage a website which use a lot virtual includes ( SSI) because it caused a lot of duplicate content i introduced the Canonical url tag. But i still see bad rankings on some pages who are the leading of the virtual includes. Now i'am wondering is it better to remove all the virtual include pages ( url's) and make a redirect 301 of it. Does anybody know that is better for ranking the head page?
Technical SEO | | JoostBruining0 -
Discontinuing a site & Redirecting Traffic to an Internal Page
We are wondering the best way to redirect the traffic from a site that will no longer exist. The Scenario:
Technical SEO | | TopFloor
Our client wants to discontinue this website http://www.animalcarepackaging.com/. We’d like to redirect the traffic from this site to an internal page on our client's other website: http://www.glenroy.com/packaging/. This internal page is the most appropriate to the content that appears on animalcarepackaging.com (as opposed to just the entire site glenroy.com). Possible Options We Are Considering:
Option 1: Keep hosting animalcarepackaging.com and add a 301 redirect for all pages to glenroy.com/packaging/. Our concern with this option is that Google/Bing will see animalcarepackaging.com as a gateway, which could hurt glenroy.com. Option 2: Keep hosting animalcarepackaging.com and add a 301 redirect so all pages are sent to glenroy.com/packaging/; AND file a change of address with Google and Bing. We believe this will allow people who have bookmarked animalcarepackaging.com to go to glenroy.com/packaging/; while people searching for animalcarepackaging.com will go to glenroy.com's home page. We would augment this by posting a message on the homepage of animalcarepackaging.com notifiying users that the site will be discontinued and info will be found at glenroy.com/packaging. Option 3: Do a change of address with Google/Bing and send all traffic to glenroy.com (rather than an internal page). Post information on the homepage of animalcarepackaging.com that the site will be discontinued on X-date, and info about animalcarepackaging.com will be able to be found at glenroy.com/packaging. Looking for feedback on our options and suggestions on how this can be handled.0 -
404 errors is webmaster - should I 301 all pages?
Currently working on a retail site that shows over 1200 404 errors coming from urls that are from products that were on the site, but have now been removed as they are seasonal/out of stock. What is the best way of dealing with this situation ongoing? I am aware of the fact that these 404s are being marked as url errors in Google Webmaster. Should I redirect these 404s to a more appropriate live page or should I leave them as they are and not redirect them? I am concerned that Google may give the site a penalty as these 404s are growing (as the site is a online retail store and has products removed from its page results regularly). I thought Google was able to recognise 404s and after a set period of time would push them out of the error report. Also is there a tool out there that on mass I can run all the 404s urls through to see their individual page strength and the number of links that point at each one? Thanks.
Technical SEO | | Oxfordcomma0 -
How do find where a 301 redirect is located
My report says I have http://www.30minuteseder.com/Passover.blog redirected to http://30minuteseder.com/Passover.blog. It is correct, but I can't find where the 301 redirect is located. I looked in my .htaccess file in the root and it's not there. How do I find it so I can change it?
Technical SEO | | Sederman0 -
301 redirects
At the moment it's possible to access the home page of my website via two different urls, with and without www. and you've told me that this can be resolved with Canonicalization and a 301 redirect. Do I do this with my web hosting package or in my html pages? If I can't do it with my web host (1&1) then is there an idiot's guide of how to do it yourself? I've also got both the domain vamospaella.co.uk and vamospaella.com. Is it better to have one of these redirecting to the other for UK traffic (at the moment .co.uk redirects to .com) Thanks
Technical SEO | | melissa10 -
Trailing Slashes In Url use Canonical Url or 301 Redirect?
I was thinking of using 301 redirects for trailing slahes to no trailing slashes for my urls. EG: www.url.com/page1/ 301 redirect to www.url.com/page1 Already got a redirect for non-www to www already. Just wondering in my case would it be best to continue using htacces for the trailing slash redirect or just go with Canonical URLs?
Technical SEO | | upick-1623910 -
301 redirect
We have just had an outside SEO agency report on our site: One of things brought up were arounf broken links, and how they class them as broken links. Could any body tell me whether this statement holds true please, as I am not aware of this "Our latest intelligence shows that google are downgrading ranking from sites that feature 301 redirects within the internal link structure". Any help would be greatly appreciated Regards
Technical SEO | | Yozzer0