A Look Inside Our 210TB 2012 Web Corpus

[mark_l_watson]

Check out the Common Crawl contest winning projects from the linked page - some very good work, and a good source of ideas and techniques: http://commoncrawl.org/the-winners-of-the-norvig-web-data-sc...

Some good stuff!

[wicknicks]

I loved the inter-lingual web page linkage visualization project. Any idea why Traitor won the contest? It seems very similar to regular "create inverted index with map reduce" problem, or am I missing something?

[Aloisius]

Link to the PDF mentioned: https://docs.google.com/file/d/1_9698uglerxB9nAglvaHkEgU-iZN...

[sylvinus]

Common Crawl is awesome. I wonder how complex it would be to run a Google-like frontend on top of it, and how good the results would be after a couple days of hacking...

[boyter]

Very and probably not very good (Compare Gigablast to Google as an example of why its hard). Not to take anything away from Common Crawl but crawling is often one of the easier things to build when creating a search engine. A crawler can be as simple as

for(listofurls) { geturl; add urls to listofurls; }

Doing it on a large scale over and over is a harder problem (which common crawl does for you) but its not too difficult until you hit scale or want realtime crawling.

Building an index on 210 TB of data however... Assuming you use Sphinx/Solr/Gigablast you are going to need about 50 machines to deal with this amount of data with any sort of redundancy. That's just to hold a basic index which is not including "pagerank" or anything (Gigablast is a web engine so it might have that in there not sure). You aren't factoring in adding rankers to make it a webs search engine, spam/porn detection and all of the other stuff that goes with it. Then you get into serving results. Unless your indexes are in RAM you are going to have a pretty slow search engine. So add a lot more machines to hold the index for common terms in memory.

If someone is keen to do this however here are a list of articles/blogs which should get you started (wrote this originally as a HN comment which got a lot of attention so made it into a blog post) http://www.boyter.org/2013/01/want-to-write-a-search-engine-...

[benhamner]

The massive advantages that Google has include over a decade of data on the pages that people actually visited in response to a specific query as well as having an in-memory index of the public web, parts of which are updated on the order of seconds to minutes.

I wonder if there is a viable business in maintaining an in-memory & up-to-date index of the public web & selling access to it, with a pricing model that scales according to the amount of computation you are doing on it.

[greglindahl]

It would be challenging. You've got a crawl, but one with a fair bit of spam in it, despite the donation of blekko metadata. Then you have to figure out ranking for keywords, something that the blekko metadata won't help you with at all.

[jamesaguilar]

Not very, or else someone would have replicated Google already (with fewer engineers and less money than Microsoft has thrown at the problem).

[sytelus]

This is actually very small corpus, just 3 billion docs. Google, for example, is known to have 50 billion docs in index.

[rgrieselhuber]

Is there something, other than funding, preventing a more regular, open-sourced crawl of the web?

[LisaG]

Limited resources are the only reason. We are working on a subset crawl of ~3 million pages that will be published weekly starting two weeks from now. But doing the full crawl takes a lot of time, effort and money.

[danso]

The tables of TLD frequency on page 4 of the stats report are interesting, though it causes some confusion to me about how the crawler actually crawls and when it stops: https://docs.google.com/file/d/1_9698uglerxB9nAglvaHkEgU-iZN...

Table 2a purports to show the frequency of SLDs:

1 youtube.com 95,866,041 0.0250

2 blogspot.com 45,738,134 0.0119

3 tumblr.com 30,135,714 0.0079

4 flickr.com 9,942,237 0.0026

5 amazon.com 6,470,283 0.0017

6 google.com 2,782,762 0.0007

7 thefreedictionary.com 2,183,753 0.0006

8 tripod.com 1,874,452 0.0005

9 hotels.com 1,733,778 0.0005

10 flightaware.com 1,280,875 0.0003

If I'm reading this correctly, it seems that the crawler managed to hit up a huge number of youtube video pages...but only a fraction of them. I couldn't find a total number of Youtube video count, but Youtube's own stats page says 200 million videos alone have been tagged with Content-ID (identified as belonging to movie/tv studios).

In any case, it's surprising to not see Wikipedia on there. English wikipedia has 4+ million articles, so it should be ahead of thefreedictionary.com

[wicknicks]

Good crawlers should typically avoid wikipedia links, to avoid the number of HTTP requests on wiki servers (and keep their costs down), esp. because they make available whole data dumps for download through a separate cheaper channel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Database_download

[jjwiseman]

There are at least 2.5M English wikipedia pages indexed in the crawl:

  $ cci_lookup org.wikipedia.en | wc -l
  2516956

(See https://github.com/wiseman/common_crawl_index, but note that the index is incomplete.)

[spimmy]

What do you mean by "open"? Can the data be used for startups and other commercial purposes?

[Aloisius]

Yes! Startups/commercial companies/etc can all use the data for free. The terms of use basically say, don't do anything illegal with it and a few other things, but it shouldn't affect the vast majority of uses.

Actually, tomorrow a video on a startup that uses Common Crawl data is getting posted.

[CrazedGeek]

From the FAQ: "Please refer to the Common Crawl Terms of Use document for a detailed, authoritative description of our Terms of Use guidelines, but, in general, you cannot republish the data retrieved from the crawl (unless allowed by fair use), you cannot resell access to the service, you cannot use the crawl data for any illegal purposes, and you must respect the Terms of Use of the sites we crawl."

http://commoncrawl.org/about/terms-of-use/

[res0nat0r]

The data is freely available: http://aws.amazon.com/datasets/41740

and you just need to comply with the Common Crawl TOU: http://commoncrawl.org/about/terms-of-use/

[natch]

How does one get set up to access the s3:// links their blog posts reference? I do realize these point to Amazon S3 buckets, but how to get at them?

[WestCoastJustin]

Just replace 's3://' with 'https://s3.amazonaws.com/'. You can use this link [1], but it looks like most of them are returning "Access Denied", so you would likely need to login with your AWS username/password to access them.

[1] https://s3.amazonaws.com/aws-publicdatasets/

[Aloisius]

You need an Amazon account - though the data is available for free, I think you need to specify your access key to actually fetch it.

From there you can grab the S3 command line tools (http://s3tools.org/s3cmd) or load it up from hadoop or through one of the various open source libraries (boto for instance).