The DCs continue to change but there are still 2 distinct groups. Since the last post, the #27 group has gone to #28 - #29 - #30 - #28 - #31 and now to #28 again. The #40 group has made similar moves but all its DCs are now suddenly at #31.

Somebody at WPW made an interesting observation - the 2 groups return greatly different numbers of results. For instance, a search on the word 'the' returns ~3 billion results in the A group (#27), and 8 billion results in the B group (which contains some sub-groups).

It could be indicative of them having different indexes, or it could mean that a different algo is being used, although it's hard to imagine what the difference in algo could be that would produce such a huge difference in the number of results for the single word 'the'. I suppose an algo that sort of pre-selects pages could account for it. For instance, and expert system sort of pre-selects pages in that only those pages that are linked to by certain other pages are considered. All other pages are not considered regardless of any on-page and off-page relevancy. It's a sort of pre-selection.

Thanks for new info.
What do you consider as # of the group? where this goups are listed?

Thanks

I don't understand the question

Hi Phil
I notice for some terms I played with that the groups do not appear to be clustered by index size.

I find different rankings for the same keywords on DCs that report the same numbers for a the search (8,000,000,000 vs 2,820,000,000)

This would seem to me to imply that there are both different indexes and different algorithms in play among the various DCs.

Hi Mel,

Group B has several sub-groups in it, which do produce different rankings. Group A's DC sets seem to be pretty consistant most of the time, although I do occassionally find variations in them. Also a few of group A's DCs switch to the other group and back, but I put those switches down to being redirected at the time.

I'm sure that there are different algos in the DCs. The apparent index sizes suggest that there are different indexes in the 2 groups, although it's possible that a different algo causes it. It would be quite a surprise if almost half of the DCs contained an index that is less than half the size of the one in the other DCs.

If anyone is interested in examining all 45 DCs, the different results show better the further down the results you go. It's a bit like a pendulum - at the top there is very little movement, but at the bottom there is a lot of movement.

For instance, I'm looking at the results for a particular searchterm on page 3, and I see only 2 variations of results across all 45 DCs, although there have been more until today. If I go down to the 10th results page, I see 5 variations for the same searchterm.

Here are the 45 datacenters that I know about (split into DC sets).
* = group A. Others are group B which contains some sub-groups.
+ = usually group A but changes often, which is probably due to redirecting.

64.233.161.99
64.233.161.104
64.233.161.105
64.233.161.147

64.233.167.99
64.233.167.104
64.233.167.147

64.233.171.99 *
64.233.171.104 *
64.233.171.105 *
64.233.171.147 *

64.233.179.99 *
64.233.179.104 *

64.233.183.99
64.233.183.104

64.233.185.99 *
64.233.185.104 *

64.233.187.99 +
64.233.187.104 +

64.233.189.104 +

66.102.7.99 *
66.102.7.104 *
66.102.7.105 *
66.102.7.147 *

66.102.9.99
66.102.9.104

66.102.11.99
66.102.11.104

216.239.37.99 *
216.239.37.104 *
216.239.37.105 *
216.239.37.147 *

216.239.39.99 *
216.239.39.104 *

216.239.53.99 +
216.239.53.104 +

216.239.57.98
216.239.57.99
216.239.57.104
216.239.57.105
216.239.57.147

216.239.59.99
216.239.59.104
216.239.59.105

216.239.63.104

216.239.39.99
216.239.39.104

216.239.53.99
216.239.53.104

216.239.57.98
216.239.57.99
216.239.57.104
216.239.57.105
216.239.57.147

216.239.59.99
216.239.59.104
216.239.59.105

216.239.63.104

I'd like a bit of help. If you read this, would you search www.google.com for 'search engine optimization' (no quotes) and tell me if you see High Rankings at #4. I'm seeing it at #7 at the moment. It's at #7 in group B DCs, but it's at #4 in group A DCs, and I want to know quickly if group A DCs are actually used to serve normal results.

I will keep checking myself, but it will be much quicker if people would also look for me.

Another indicator is that group B DCs show ~7,790,000 results for that searchterm, and group A DCs show ~5,590,000.

>>> click here to do the search <<<

The reason that I'm wondering about this is that the guy at WPW (see earlier post) has been watching 2 DC groups for 2 weeks I've been watching them for a week, and I'm beginning to wonder if we should start thinking in terms of 2 Googles.

its 7

Its #7 from here Phil

A couple of people on Janeth's forum have seen #4s, but I'd like to know if those DCs deliver results as 'normally' as the others do. So I'd appreciate a quick search from time to time - looking for #4s.

Since I posted, many of the #4s have gone over to #7s so there are a lot of them now. But I'm sure they are only temporary redirections - it's not uncommon.

highrankings on #4 out of 6.020.000 results

I am now seeing highrankings at #4

I'm still seeing it at #7, but a few people have seen it at #4 (right now it can even be #3). Most of the DCs have had it at #7 since I asked for people to search and, since a few people have seen it at #4, it should be safe to say that the #4 DCs do produce results as normally as the rest of them.

So I'm beginning to think in terms of 2 or more Googles. It sounds silly, huh? But the different groups are effectively different engines - different index size, or different algorithms, or both. The difference being that we don't get the choice as to which we search. I wish I'd been watching all the DCs from a long time ago.

It's #4 for me again Phil. That makes it two times I've seen it at #4 - and one at #7.

here its 4 - 64.233.171.99, 64.233.171.104, 64.233.171.105, 64.233.171.147...
and many many more.. you can check it in my dance tool.

I think its 50%/50%

Wlas

2nd time #4 here, now out of 6,690,000 results

Thanks guys.

Cerebru, I know it's at #4 on some DCs. That's why I'm asking people to search google.com - to find out if those DCs normally provide results like the other DCs do.

From people's checking in 2 forums, Ive concluded that those DCs do normally provide results.

so what is the conclusion? or we must wait more?

I'm going to keep watching to see if the groups come together - like DCs used to do. But, somehow, I don't think they will. They produce different results because they either have a different index, or a different algorithm, or both. I don't see any merit in having a different index, but I do see the merit in having different algos - to see the results produced by new/tweaked ones without screwing everything up completely.

diffirent algos on diffirent DC's are great idea... they can test new algos some tweaks to see which serps are more relevant. I think there are the same indexes but diffirent tweaked algos...

Quick thought here, what if the difference we are seeing is that the new index is being uploaded at the moment to the different servers or perhaps switched over so to speak, and instead of there being a different index and a different algo we are seeing the fluctions because the servers are getting loaded at the time that we are doing the searches.
This would explain two things
1) the difference in the actual index size
2) The fluctuaions that we are seeing in the actual results.

It would, but it's been going on for at least 2 weeks, and it doesn't take that long to load a new index into all the DCs.

Also, changes are occuring continually that cannot be anything to do with loading a new index.

Certainly individual DCs and sets of DCs (IP sets) redirect to other DCs quite often, and that accounts for many fluctuations from specific DCs. But again, the activity cannot be just about uploading new indexes.

I can't see the merit in having different indexes, and I feel sure that the apparent different index sizes are a reflection of different algos, and not of different indexes.

Wow this is good. Google seemed to have (what I thought) put some kind of ranking-penalty on us over the last couple of weeks. On one set of data centers we are showing better than before the supposed penalty, while on the other we are still no where to be seen. I hope it sorts itself out to leave us ranking well on all data centers.