Wow is that ever a terrible infographic.
Well, search is their primary service; their web indexing algorithms are sort of their Mother of All Secret Sauces. You wouldn't expect Coke to publish the exact recipe.
Our new search index: Caffeine
51–60 of 82 posts
Re: Our new search index: Caffeine
#52Wow is that ever a terrible infographic.
Perhaps you have to "build search engines for a living like [them]" to understand it.
Re: Our new search index: Caffeine
#53[deleted]
Re: Our new search index: Caffeine
#54old index: problem: parts of the index were refreshed at a faster rate than others; the main layer would update every couple of weeks and to refresh a layer of the old index, Google would analyze the entire web first. impact: there was a significant delay between when Google found a page and made it available to its users. new index: solution: caffeine, Google's new index will analyze the web in small portions and up…
Hmmm... come to think about it I have been getting quite a lot of results from CodeWeblog.com in my search results. Unfortunately, that site seems to be a link farm and its so useless that I reported it to the Google spam page. Maybe its appearance in the top sites was a result of the Caffeine changes.
Re: Our new search index: Caffeine
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, the serving part of their index is in memory (or largely so) as has been publicly announced. But are you really suggesting they might do the same for indexing? Let's suppose for a second that they can get 8GB sticks of RAM for 1/3 the retail price of around $600, and for the sake of the back of the envelope calculation, let's round it up to ten GB. So let's call it $20/GB of RAM. Four gigabyte sticks might seem…
Why use RAM? You can get a 500GB SSD for $1000. 100 PB would cost you $200 Million, which is peanuts to Google. Or you could use PCIe SSD drives. You can get a TB of PCIe for $3000, and a 5 PCIe x16 mother board at Fry's costs around $300. You could get 100PB of PCIe SSd storage for around $300 M. You could use RAM for very fast cache, and SSD storage for faster than HDD indexing and retrieval.
Ssds aren't reliable enough for Google scale. The rater number of writes before failure for Flash would make replacement a constant effort for them and ruin any economy. You need Ram for the reliability as well as the random access speed.
Re: Our new search index: Caffeine
#56What I dislike about Google's current algorithm is that when I search for a common term such as "javadoc simpledateformat", the API documentation for Java 1.4.2 (as opposed to 1.6) comes up as apparently, that is what most documents on the web link to. I hope this new index will allow more recent and more up-to-date documents to get to the top of the results list.
Re: Our new search index: Caffeine
#57they could be using in-memory compression. they could be storing hot parts of index in memory. they could be using both.
Re: Our new search index: Caffeine
#58What I dislike about Google's current algorithm is that when I search for a common term such as "javadoc simpledateformat", the API documentation for Java 1.4.2 (as opposed to 1.6) comes up as apparently, that is what most documents on the web link to. I hope this new index will allow more recent and more up-to-date documents to get to the top of the results list.
I tend to use "java6 simpledateformat" as my query for that.