Are there any negative side effects of having millions of URLs on your site?
-
After a site upgrade, we found that we have over 3.7 million URLs on our site. Many of these URLs are due to the facet options. Each facet combination yields a different URL. However, we need to do a deeper analysis into these URLs to see if this is the only reason why so many are returning.
Does anyone know if there are any negatives of having so many URLs crawled, other than the fact that Google only spends so much time crawling a site? Is the number of URLs something that should be concerning?
Any insight appreciated!
-
Agree with the points above with one exception. Yes, you have to find a way to deal with duplicate and quality content at scale. Yes, Robots.txt, nofollow links and index sitemaps are your friends. I would not use rel=canonical unless I had to. Better to get those extra pages de-indexed and then not let Google crawl the urls with the extra parameters to start with. Why waste Google's time in crawling pages that are just resorted versions of another? If you use the directives wisely you probably "only" have 200,000 pages worth crawling if you have that many sort parameters.
Good luck!
-
I'll echo Robert's concern about duplicate content. If those facet combinations are creating many pages with very similar content, that could be an issue for you.
If, let's say, there are 100 facet combinations that create essentially the same basic page content, then consider taking facet elements that do NOT substantially change the page content, and use rel=canonical to tell Google that those are all really the same page. For instance, let's say one of the facets is packaging size, and product X comes in boxes of 1, 10, 100, or 500 units. Let's say another facet is color, and it comes in blue, green, or red. Let's say the URLs for these look like this:
www.mysite.com/product.php?pid=12345&color=blue&pkgsize=1
www.mysite.com/product.php?pid=12345&color=green&pkgsize=10
www.mysite.com/product.php?pid=12345&color=red&pkgsize=100
You would want to set the rel=canonical on all of these to:
www.mysite.com/product.php?pid=12345
Be sure that your XML sitemap, your on-page meta robots, and your rel=canonicals are all in agreement. In other words, if a page has meta robots "noindex,follow", it should NOT show up in your XML sitemap. If the pages above have their rel=canonicals set as described, then your sitemap should contain www.mysite.com/product.php?pid=12345 and NONE of the three example URLs with the color and pkgsize parameters above.
-
There are several concerns to be addressed with this scenario:
- Organization
This is going to be very difficult to keep track of. If you are well-organized or the pages will not need much adjusting, this is probably okay.
- Duplicate Content
This is going to be a pain the behind. That being said, most site auditing tools will allow you to make adjustments as necessary.
- Broken Links
With a site of this size, broken links and 404's are going to be inevitable. This could lead to some negative SEO impacts and will have to be kept on top of.
- Hacking
This is a big reason why some sites have enormous numbers of URLs. This would likely be the biggest concern on my mind and worth looking in to. Going through that many pages will be impossible, so it might be worth taking a look at the link profile and determining where most of your links are coming from. If these are coming from spammy sites, you may have a problem there.
All this being said, the size of a website is normally not a cause for concern. Just make sure that your main pages (Home, Landing Pages) are properly handled and optimized and you shouldn't have too much trouble. I would add that unwieldy htaccess files (large ones) can result in slower loading times, which can impact your rankings with Google.
Let me know if there is anything specific concerning you and I will be happy to help. Congrats on the upgrade and hope it works out!
Rob
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
-
301'd site, but new site is not getting picked up in google.
Hi I'm having big issues! Any help would be greatly appreciated This is the 3rd time this happened. Every time I switch my old site greatcleanjokes.com to the new design of chokeonajoke.com traffic goes almost completely down (I even tried out the new design on greatcleanjokes [to see if it was a 301 issue] and traffic also went down.) What can possibly be wrong with this new site that google just doesn't like it ?! I was ranking high up for many big phrase like joke of the day, corny jokes, clean jokes, short jokes. Now It's all gone. I also think it's strange that when I search for site:chokeonajoke.com the post pages show up before the category pages!? Here is the old site http://web.archive.org/web/20140406214615/http://www.greatcleanjokes.com/ Here is the new one http://chokeonajoke.com/ If you can't figure out anything do you know of anyone I can hire who may be able to figure it out?
Technical SEO | | Nickys22111 -
Why are URLs like www.site.com/#something being indexed?
So, everything after a hash (#) is not supposed to be crawled and indexed. Has that changed? I see a clients site with all sorts of URLs indexed like ... http://www.website.com/#!category/c11f For the above URL, I thought it was the same as simply http://www.website.com/. But they aren't, they're getting indexed and all the content on the pages with these hash tags are getting crawled as well. Thanks!
Technical SEO | | wiredseo0 -
Site Map
For a long time our site map used to be http://www.efurniturehouse.com/sitemap.xml recently our hosting company changed the site map to: http://www.efurniturehouse.com/xml-sitemap.ashx I went ahead and submitted the new site maps to both Google Webmaster and Bing. I submitted the Google one on Monday and it states PENDING. ( A day later this pending) I just submitted the map to Bing. I now have 2 site maps on each. 1)Is having 2 a problem Will they ignore the old site map or can we delete and if so when can we delete I appreciate your input Regards Tony www.eFurnitureHouse.com
Technical SEO | | OCFurniture0 -
What is the best way to find missing alt tags on my site (site wide - not page by page)?
I am looking to find all the missing alt tags on my site at once. I have a FF extension that use to do it page by page, but my site is huge and that will take forever. Thanks!!
Technical SEO | | franchisesolutions1 -
Help optimising this site
Hi I have been optimising this site http://seakayakdevon.co.uk/ which is a wordpress site since making changes to it recently the site is now indexed and appearing among its competitors. trouble is they still are placed higher rn the SE rankings. i wish to optimise for local search i.e on Google places etc. but the trouble is there is'nt a physical address for the business it is run from various coastal locations. any ideas how i can still market for local search- maps etc. I have done the following optimisation: sitemaps title tag, description tag improved content removed duplicate content an blocker pages replace image text and replaced with header tag improved page names - making them static any advice of guidance would be greatly appreciated- will the fatc its built in wordpress limit its ability to gain better ranking in the SE? Thanks
Technical SEO | | Bristolweb0 -
Will rankings for my micro site rank better if I 301 redirect it to my main site?
This is my first time asking so I will try to be as clear as possible. Ok, I have a micro site that is an (exact match domain) and the domain is a couple 3-4 years old and ranks very well for several search terms. The main two terms it ranks for are like this. houses for rent in XXXXX XXXXX homes for rent (XXXXX equals a city name) The issue is this site has no backlinks, zero advanced SEO, I only did basic optimization to it when i set the site up. Even site structure, url structure all are not good.
Technical SEO | | Robbie8299
The only page I have ever even seen rank is the main root url. But with all that the site does really good in the top 1-2 results for key search terms. Now, I have a main site that is a very big site that has steadily been climbing in search terms every month with great backlinks, optimized for the city and all.
It currently ranks on second page for the listed search terms listed above. What I want to do is 301 redirect this microsite to my city page on my main site that is much better optimized for the key city terms.
The 301 redirect would point this "root domain" (mymicrosite.com) to my city page that looks like this. www.mymaindomain.com/city/XXXXXXX If I do this will Google rank my main URL city page as well as it ranks this microsite with zero links, seo, etc, etc. What happens if it does not? Will I be able to turn off the 301 redirect and keep the microsite rankings? My main reason for wanting this is I want this city page to rank well and I only want to optimize one site instead of both. Any help would be great!0 -
Moving Duplicate Sites
Apologies in advance for the complexity. My client, company A, has purchased company B in the same industry, with A and B having separate domains. Current hosting arrangement combines registrar and hosting functions in 1 account so as to allow both domains to point to a common folder, with the result that identical content is displayed for both A & B. The current site is kind of an amalgam of A and B. Company A has decided to rebrand and completely absorb company B. The problem is that link value overwhelmingly favours B over A. The current (only) hosting package is Windows, and I am creating a new site and moving them to Linux with another hosting company. I can use 301's for A , but not for B as it is a separate domain and currently shares a hosting package with A. How can I best preserve the link juice that domain B has? The only conclusion I can come up with is to set up separate Linux hosting for B which will allow for the use of 301's. Does anyone have a better idea?
Technical SEO | | waynekolenchuk0