SEO dealing with a CDN on a site.
-
This one is stumping me and I need some help. I have a client who's site is www.site.com and we have set them up a CDN through Max CDN at cdn.site.com which is basically a cname to the www.site.com site. The images in the GWT for www.site.com are de-indexing rapidly and the images on cdn.site.com are not indexing. In the Max CDN account I have the images from cdn.site.com sending a canonical header from www.site.com but that does not seem to help, they are all still de-indexing.
-
In my experience Google does a pretty good job of applying the rankings to the CDN version of the image if you follow those best practices.
Good luck!
-
They were being de-indexed until I did this, http://moz.com/community/q/would-this-be-considered-cloaking-and-would-it-be-a-bad-move
The images are not dynamic at all, they have static urls. The only thing that was being changes was the sub domain from www to cdn. When that happened the images started to de-index on the www sub domain, even though the cdn sub domain image had a canonical header pointing back to the www domain. You are welcome to check it out in action, the site is https://www.redwrappings.com.au/
-
Very odd, then, that they're being removed from the index. Do you think it's possible that the images have different URLs depending on which server they're cached on? That could definitely do it. I'd have a friend across the country pull them up and see if the image URL changes.
I'm assuming that the image has some dynamic characters on it, which is pretty common with CDNs under certain configurations. Unfortunately, I've never used MaxCDN. If the image is just cdn.site.com/image.png - I'm afraid I have absolutely no idea why they wouldn't be re-indexed. I have similar CDN images that pull in fine.
-
That article touches on a lot of the issues. Here are my thoughts and you can tell me if I am incorrect in my thinking. For a couple of years the images have been on the www part of the domain, now they are on a CDN sub directory. I was trying to keep them indexed under the www part of domain so that they would keep the authority of the domain. My thoughts were if they are de-indexed under the www and re-indexed under the cdn they would have to climb their way back in the image search rankings. Basically that is what I was trying to avoid.
-
They are static. It is a passthrough CDN that basically strips off the www of the image url and replaces it with cdn.
-
Hello Lesley,
Here is an article that may help, or provide some links to other resources at the bottom: Four Best Practices for Using a CDN .
Are you keeping the same filenames or do those change?
What is in the robots.txt file on the CDN?
Have you set up and verified the CDN in Google Webmaster Tools? If so, have you submitted an XML Sitemap?
-
Hi there,
Could you tell me whether the URLs on your images are static on the CDN sub-domain? Or do they change regularly?
-
Christy,
Sure thing, this is what is in place now, http://moz.com/community/q/would-this-be-considered-cloaking-and-would-it-be-a-bad-move
-
Thanks for the update, Lesley. I'm sorry to hear that you haven't found a solution you're happy with. Let me see if any of the other Associates can help you troubleshoot this. In the meantime, are you able to to share the details of your workaround?
Christy
-
None of the answers really applied. I did a work around that I am not too happy with at the current time.
-
Hi Lesley, what is the current status of this issue? Were you able to resolve it, or are you still having problems? We'd love an update, thanks!
Christy
-
I have not actually set up the robots.txt in maxcdn. But the cdn is not indexing, which is what I am wanting, doing the site: search for the cdn shows no results. For the main site though the images are falling out of the index, even though there is a site map for them and they are still accessible from their normal url.
-
I am not using Wordpress, the site is using PrestaShop, so it does not have those plugins.
This is how it is set up.
cdn.site.com is a cname of www.site.com so images are accessible from www.site.com/image.jpg and cdn.site.com/image.jpg but when they are served from the cdn.site.com/image.jpg they have the canonical header that points to www.site.com/image.jpg I cannot understand why that would de-index all of the images on www.site.com though
-
I had this problem.
Are you using W3 Total Cache... if so you should activate the Yoast SEO extension (presumably you use Yoast, and their sitemaps). You will find it at Performance -> Extensions in the W3 Total Cache admin area.
In addition, with the robots file in Maxcdn you should have something like:
User-agent: *
Disallow:/
Allow: /wp-content/
Allow: /wp-includes/You will find this under the SEO settings of your Pull zone in MaxCDN. Make sure you have robots & canonical header ticked as well.
The W3 Total cache extension will sort all the sitemap problems with pointing to the right URL and canonical. There is no need to do anything manually as some of the articles suggest.
-
I have no problem helping you look into this. I can play with it more tomorrow morning. I have a few more questions though. Did you setup the robots.txt in MaxCDN to point to the origin directory of the images? What happens when you search site:cdn.domain.com or site:www.domain.com in Google?
There are a few ideas that I have into why this is happening but I would like to test them prior to posting.
-
It is a pull zone.
-
Are you currently using a "Pull" or "Push" zone on MaxCDN?
-
That is actually what has been done, I have seen the article before. But there are two issues, one they are not indexing and it has been a couple of weeks. But the more major issue to me is that using the cdn url none of the link juice from the main domain is being passed to the cdn sub domain. I am trying to figure out why Google is not respecting the canonical header for the images. It would seem to me, that according to what Matt Cutts says that it would. But it is not.
-
I have had this issue in past as well when working with MaxCDN. I was able to apply a fix using some of the methods in this article to fix the issue.
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
-
Pagination, SEO, and you
So, i have done some research on this and I am running into 2 problems. We run a review site for a specific niche. wordpress is viewing our category pages as an "archive" which i don't know that it really is. Google seems to only be indexing the first 9 pages of this category. We would like google to be indexing these pages because thats the only place on our website where all our specific products are linked. Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.
Reporting & Analytics | | HashtagHustler1 -
Differences in site search revenue in GA
I just put in a piece of software to replace a really bad built in site search engine on my 3dcart website. Now I am trying to measure the change, but I am having some issues. When I check the ecom data in the conversions section of GA with the built in segment Performed Site Search, I get promising results. Approximately 5% revenue increase over LY. But if we jump to behavior, site search, usage, and then check the visits with site search, I get a decrease by 4%. And the actual revenue is off, by like double (150k compared to 80k) Anyone have any idea why I am getting these results? The site search function is set up. Tracking is enabled, query parameter is keyword and search url is /search.asp?keyword=
Reporting & Analytics | | ShockoeCommerce0 -
Free Media Site / High Traffic / Low Engagement / Strategies and Questions
Hi, Imagine a site "mediapalooza dot com" where the only thing you do there is view free media. Yet Google Analytics is showing the average view of a media page is about a minute; where the average length of media is 20 - 90 minutes. And imagine that most of this media is "classic" and that it is generally not available elsewhere. Note also that the site ranks terribly in Google, despite having decent Domain Authority (in the high 30's), Page Authority in the mid 40's and a great site and otherwise quite active international user base with page views in the tens of thousands per month. Is it possible that GA is not tracking engagement (time on site) correctly? Even accounting for the imperfect method of GA that measures "next key pressed" as a way to terminate the page as a way to measure time on page, our stats are truly abysmal, in the tenths of a percentage point of time measured when compared with actual time we think the pages are being used. If so, will getting engagement tracking to more accurately measure time on specif pages and site signal Google that this site is actually more important than current ranking indicates? There's lots of discussion about "dwell time" as this relates to ranking, and I'm postulating that if we can show Google that we have extremely good engagement instead of the super low stats that we are reporting now, then we might get a boost in ranking. Am I crazy? Has anyone got any data that proves or disproves this theory? as I write this out, I detect many issues - let's have a discussion on what else might be happening here. We already know that low engagement = low ranking. Will fixing GA to show true engagement have any noticeable impact on ranking? Can't wait to see what the MOZZERS think of this!
Reporting & Analytics | | seo_plus0 -
International SEO Domains & Avg Session Duration
I have a couple questions 1) Is there any SEO value to forwarding multiple domains to the same domain? For instance, we own dozens of of the same domain name but with International extensions. I haven't seen much on this topic and assume that Google ignores such domain names (they don't really have much of any links to them). 2) Is there any research on whether time on site is declining across the web? I've noticed a trend over the years but I want to make sure this is a standard user behavior as people jump around quicker and search hop for information.
Reporting & Analytics | | ScottOlson0 -
Why does a selection of sites I have written guest posts on not come up on my link analysis?
I have done a few guests posts on different sites and they are not coming up in my link analysis report.
Reporting & Analytics | | meteorelectrical
We created an info graphic on one particular site and this site isn't coming up on the link analysis report. Would there be a reason for this. I ran a check on the sites code and it doesnt contain "nofollow" as i originally thought this was the problem. Here is an example of our work on a site that isn't coming up on the analysis report. http://www.electriciansblog.co.uk/2013/10/energy-saving-using-led-lighting/ Thanks0 -
If you have G+ buttons on your site, does google still suggest you add them?
We've had G+ buttons on the site for many months now (Can't remember exactly when they were added.) Yet in Google Webmaster Tools, they still give me this message: "Get more recommendations in Google Search and grow your audience on Google+. Add the Google+ badge to your site." Is this happening to everyone, or is it just me? Do they think the buttons aren't there? Also, they say this: "Your site doesn't have enough +1's yet to show characteristics." According to the stats, 551 unique people have +1'd our pages. How many does it take, to get stats? Anyone willing to give stats?
Reporting & Analytics | | loopyal0 -
Email campaigns. Should I link to my blog or to my site?
I have a client for who we write and post a daily blog article. The articles are optimized and linked to particular targeted content on his top level site. Now we are going to start e-marketing to his 3000+ website users to announce inventory changes and specials. My question is (from a SE standpoint) are we better off linking the e-mail content to the blog and introducing people to the blog (but adding an additional step for getting to the new inventory. Or are we better off putting a link in the HTML E-mail letter that we send out to both the blog and separately to the inventory section? Just to clarify, we wonder if the search engines would provide some additional authority for the extra blog traffic and thereby build the overall score of the blog & site. We are looking at the e-mail campaigns as a potential opportunity to impact SE scores not just awareness of new inventory. Thanks everyone!
Reporting & Analytics | | webindustry0 -
Tracking SEO tests
Trying to get some best practices on testing SEO changes. We are going to make a bunch of changes on subsets of pages. Say testing about 5 different on-page changes. Originally we were going to submit separate Sitemaps to GWT and see if our test sets get indexed, how quickly, etc. But we noticed that GWT says some pages in our Sitemaps aren't indexed even though we know they are (what gives?). So we thought, for each test, let's put a unique code on the page so we can see how many get indexed by Google. But that doesn't solve the issue: how many people clicked on our test pages. So we are thinking of putting a tracking pixel on the test pages, specific for each test. But then I am thinking, why not just create a separate Google Analytics profile and place that code on the test pages (set up goals to track visits per test since we aren't going to change the actual URLs). and on and on This is where you come in. What kind of tracking do you implement when you set up tests? Advice appreciated! E
Reporting & Analytics | | ErinTM0