Robots.txt Download vs Cache
-
We made an update to the Robots.txt file this morning after the initial download of the robots.txt file. I then submitted the page through Fetch as Google bot to get the changes in asap.
The cache time stamp on the page now shows Sep 27, 2013 15:35:28 GMT. I believe that would put the cache time stamp at about 6 hours ago. However the Blocked URLs tab in Google WMT shows the robots.txt last downloaded at 14 hours ago - and therefore it's showing the old file.
This leads me to believe for the Robots.txt the cache date and the download time are independent. Is there anyway to get Google to recognize the new file other than waiting this out??
-
No to my knowledge. You will have to wait. Anyway, Google could have already download the new robots but while the reports are showing the older file. Those reports always take a while until refreshing completely.
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
-
Is there a limit to how many URLs you can put in a robots.txt file?
We have a site that has way too many urls caused by our crawlable faceted navigation. We are trying to purge 90% of our urls from the indexes. We put no index tags on the url combinations that we do no want indexed anymore, but it is taking google way too long to find the no index tags. Meanwhile we are getting hit with excessive url warnings and have been it by Panda. Would it help speed the process of purging urls if we added the urls to the robots.txt file? Could this cause any issues for us? Could it have the opposite effect and block the crawler from finding the urls, but not purge them from the index? The list could be in excess of 100MM urls.
Technical SEO | | kcb81780 -
My website internal pages are not getting cached with latest data
In our website we have sector list, in home page main category list is displayed click on main category user has to select sub category and reach the result page. EX: Agriculture->Agribusiness->Rice Agriculture page is indexed,but Agribusiness and Rice page is not getting cached,it is showing old indexed date as 23 July 2013,but i have submitted the sitemaps after this 4 times, and some url i have submitted manually in web master tool, but after this also my pages are not cached recently, Please suggest the solution and what might be the problem Thank you In Advance, Anne
Technical SEO | | Vidyavati0 -
Can I rely on just robots.txt
We have a test version of a clients web site on a separate server before it goes onto the live server. Some code from the test site has some how managed to get Google to index the test site which isn't great! Would simply adding a robots text file to the root of test simply blocking all be good enough or will i have to put the meta tags for no index and no follow etc on all pages on the test site also?
Technical SEO | | spiralsites0 -
Link rel next previous VS duplicate page title
Hello, I am running into a little problem that i would like to have a feedback on. I am running multiple wordpress blogs and Seo Moz pro is telling me that i have duplicate title tags on canadiansavers.ca vs http://www.canadiansavers.ca/page/2 I can dynamically add a page 2 to the title but I am correctly using the link rel: next and rel:previous Why is it seen as a duplicate title tag and should i add the page 2, page 3... in the meta title thanks
Technical SEO | | pixweb0 -
Google inconsistent in display of meta content vs page content?
Our e-comm site includes more than 250 brand pages - lrg image, some fluffy text, maybe a video, links to categories for that brand, etc. In many cases, Google publishes our page title and description in their search results. However, in some cases, Google instead publishes our H1 and the aforementioned fluffy page content. We want our page content to read well, be descriptive of the brand and appropriate for the audience. We want our meta titles and descriptions brief and likely to attract CTR from qualified shoppers. I'm finding this difficult to manage when Google pulls from two different areas inconsistently. So my question... Is there a way to ensure Google only utilizes our title/desc for our listings?
Technical SEO | | websurfer0 -
OK to block /js/ folder using robots.txt?
I know Matt Cutts suggestions we allow bots to crawl css and javascript folders (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PNEipHjsEPU) But what if you have lots and lots of JS and you dont want to waste precious crawl resources? Also, as we update and improve the javascript on our site, we iterate the version number ?v=1.1... 1.2... 1.3... etc. And the legacy versions show up in Google Webmaster Tools as 404s. For example: http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/global_functions.js?v=1.1
Technical SEO | | AndreVanKets
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/jquery.cookie.js?v=1.1
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/global.js?v=1.2
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/jquery.validate.min.js?v=1.1
http://www.discoverafrica.com/js/json2.js?v=1.1 Wouldn't it just be easier to prevent Googlebot from crawling the js folder altogether? Isn't that what robots.txt was made for? Just to be clear - we are NOT doing any sneaky redirects or other dodgy javascript hacks. We're just trying to power our content and UX elegantly with javascript. What do you guys say: Obey Matt? Or run the javascript gauntlet?0 -
How long does it take for traffic to bounce back from and accidental robots.txt disallow of root?
We accidentally uploaded a robots.txt disallow root for all agents last Tuesday and did not catch the error until yesterday.. so 6 days total of exposure. Organic traffic is down 20%. Google has since indexed the correct version of the robots.txt file. However, we're still seeing awful titles/descriptions in the SERPs and traffic is not coming back. GWT shows that not many pages were actually removed from the index but we're still seeing drastic rankings decreases. Anyone been through this? Any sort of timeline for a recovery? Much appreciated!
Technical SEO | | bheard0 -
Singular vs plural in urls
In keyword research for an ecommerce site, I've found that widget, singular gets a lot more searches than widgets, plural AND is much less competitive. Is it better for SEO purposes to have the URLs (and matching title tags) in the catalog as /brass-widget.html, /steel-widget.html, etc., or /brass-widgets.html, etc.? I'm worried that a) searches for widgets will pass by the singular urls but not vice versa, and b) the singular form will strike visitors as bad grammar. Any advice?
Technical SEO | | AmericanOutlets0
