Idle Connection Timeout for Sever Load Balancer
-
We are using Amazon Web Server for www.mastersindia.co. Please help me to know what is idle timeout for server load balancer for AWS.
-
Is time out a response code you are getting when querying your own website in some way? Usually it means you are crawling a site too fast and it's refusing to respond (or it can't respond in time as it has too many requests)
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
-
Load Balancer issues on Search Console
The top linked domains in search console are coming from our load balancer setup. Does anyone know how to remove these as unique sites pointing back to our primary domain? I was told Google is smart enough to ignore these as duplicate domains but if that was the case, why would they be listed as the top linked domains in search console? Most concerned....
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DonFerrari21690 -
Lazy Load Pictures on main page
Hello, our website is https://www.neakriti.gr If you open our page you will see its fast (for its size - we use AKAMAI and caching), but we have a large number of pictures on the main page - that inevitably cost loading time. I believe there could be a dramatic reduction in the time taken to load the pictures if we implemented a lazy load approach for the "below" the fold" content. Would a lazy load approach increase our SEO score on our main page? If yes, how should it be implemented in SEO terms? (I mean so that search engines are able to find the pictures that are not loaded beforehand).
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ioannisanif0 -
Lazy Loading of products on an E-Commerce Website - Options Needed
Hi Moz Fans. We are in the process of re-designing our product pages and we need to improve the page load speed. Our developers have suggested that we load the associated products on the page using Lazy Loading, While I understand this will certainly have a positive impact on the page load speed I am concerned on the SEO impact. We can have upwards of 50 associated products on a page so need a solution. So far I have found the following solution online which uses Lazy Loading and Escaped Fragments - The concern here is from serving an alternate version to search engines. The solution was developed by Google not only for lazy loading, but for indexing AJAX contents in general.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | JBGlobalSEO
Here's the official page: Making AJAX Applications Crawlable. The documentation is simple and clear, but in a few words the solution is to use slightly modified URL fragments.
A fragment is the last part of the URL, prefixed by #. Fragments are not propagated to the server, they are used only on the client side to tell the browser to show something, usually to move to a in-page bookmark.
If instead of using # as the prefix, you use #!, this instructs Google to ask the server for a special version of your page using an ugly URL. When the server receives this ugly request, it's your responsibility to send back a static version of the page that renders an HTML snapshot (the not indexed image in our case). It seems complicated but it is not, let's use our gallery as an example. Every gallery thumbnail has to have an hyperlink like: http://www.idea-r.it/...#!blogimage=<image-number></image-number> When the crawler will find this markup will change it to
http://www.idea-r.it/...?_escaped_fragment_=blogimage=<image-number></image-number> Let's take a look at what you have to answer on the server side to provide a valid HTML snapshot.
My implementation uses ASP.NET, but any server technology will be good. var fragment = Request.QueryString[``"_escaped_fragment_"``];``if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(fragment))``{``var escapedParams = fragment.Split(``new``[] { ``'=' });``if (escapedParams.Length == 2)``{``var imageToDisplay = escapedParams[1];``// Render the page with the gallery showing ``// the requested image (statically!)``...``}``} What's rendered is an HTML snapshot, that is a static version of the gallery already positioned on the requested image (server side).
To make it perfect we have to give the user a chance to bookmark the current gallery image.
90% comes for free, we have only to parse the fragment on the client side and show the requested image if (window.location.hash)``{``// NOTE: remove initial #``var fragmentParams = window.location.hash.substring(1).split(``'='``);``var imageToDisplay = fragmentParams[1]``// Render the page with the gallery showing the requested image (dynamically!)``...``} The other option would be to look at a recommendation engine to show a small selection of related products instead. This would cut the total number of related products down. The concern with this one is we are removing a massive chunk of content from he existing pages, Some is not the most relevant but its content. Any advice and discussion welcome 🙂0 -
How can I prevent duplicate pages being indexed because of load balancer (hosting)?
The site that I am optimising has a problem with duplicate pages being indexed as a result of the load balancer (which is required and set up by the hosting company). The load balancer passes the site through to 2 different URLs: www.domain.com www2.domain.com Some how, Google have indexed 2 of the same URLs (which I was obviously hoping they wouldn't) - the first on www and the second on www2. The hosting is a mirror image of each other (www and www2), meaning I can't upload a robots.txt to the root of www2.domain.com disallowing all. Also, I can't add a canonical script into the website header of www2.domain.com pointing the individual URLs through to www.domain.com etc. Any suggestions as to how I can resolve this issue would be greatly appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | iam-sold0 -
New site, new URL, lots of custom content. Load it all or "trickle" it over time?
New site, new URL, lots of custom content. Load it all or "trickle" it over time? Would it make a difference in terms of ranking the site? Interested in your thoughts. Thanks! BBuck!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | BBuck0 -
Page loads fine for users but returns a 404 for Google & Moz
I have an e-commerce website that is built using Wordpress and the WP E-commerce plug-in, the products have always worked fine and the pages when you view them in a browser work fine and people can purchase the products with no problems. However in the Google merchant feed and in the Moz crawl diagnostics certain product pages are returning a 404 error message and I can't work out why, especially as the pages load fine in the browser. I had a look at the page headers and can see when the page does load the initial request does return a 404 error message, then every other request goes through and loads fine. Can anyone help me as to why this is happening? A link to the product I have been using to test is: http://earthkindoriginals.co.uk/organic-clothing/lounge-wear/organic-tunic-top/ Here is a part of the header dump that I did: http://earthkindoriginals.co.uk/organic-clothing/lounge-wear/organic-tunic-top/
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | leapSEO
GET /organic-clothing/lounge-wear/organic-tunic-top/ HTTP/1.1
Host: earthkindoriginals.co.uk
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Ubuntu; Linux x86_64; rv:21.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/21.0
Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,/;q=0.8
Accept-Language: en-gb,en;q=0.5
Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate
Cookie: __utma=159840937.1804930013.1369831087.1373619597.1373622660.4; __utmz=159840937.1369831087.1.1.utmcsr=(direct)|utmccn=(direct)|utmcmd=(none); wp-settings-1=imgsize%3Dmedium%26hidetb%3D1%26editor%3Dhtml%26urlbutton%3Dnone%26mfold%3Do%26align%3Dcenter%26ed_size%3D160%26libraryContent%3Dbrowse; wp-settings-time-1=1370438004; __utmb=159840937.3.10.1373622660; PHPSESSID=e6f3b379d54c1471a8c662bf52c24543; __utmc=159840937
Connection: keep-alive
HTTP/1.1 404 Not Found
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 09:58:33 GMT
Server: Apache
X-Powered-By: PHP/5.2.17
X-Pingback: http://earthkindoriginals.co.uk/xmlrpc.php
Expires: Wed, 11 Jan 1984 05:00:00 GMT
Cache-Control: no-cache, must-revalidate, max-age=0
Pragma: no-cache
Vary: Accept-Encoding
Content-Encoding: gzip
Content-Length: 6653
Connection: close
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-80 -
Pages that takes more then 1,5 second to load penalized?
Hi all I just read an article (print) about the importance of af having a fast website. The author claims that all pages that are taking longer than 1,5 second to load is getting penalized in the SERPS. Speed is of course a ranking factor. But I have never heard a statement like this before. Is 1,5 second a guideline from Google? Can anyone say, where this number is coming from? Is there maybe another guideline to be followed? Thanks in advance for your comments / answers 🙂 Best regards, Kenneth Karl Nielsen
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | KennethK0 -
Load balancing - duplicate content?
Our site switches between www1 and www2 depending on the server load, so (the way I understand it at least) we have two versions of the site. My question is whether the search engines will consider this as duplicate content, and if so, what sort of impact can this have on our SEO efforts? I don't think we've been penalised, (we're still ranking) but our rankings probably aren't as strong as they should be. The SERPs show a mixture of www1 and www2 content when I do a branded search. Also, when I try to use any SEO tools that involve a site crawl I usually encounter problems. Any help is much appreciated!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ChrisHillfd0
