So Outside Technology Security CMS
AnQiCMS
Online Demonstration

Does the update frequency and priority in the site map still affect inclusion?

📅 2026-11-01 👁️ 0

Does the update frequency and priority in the sitemap still affect inclusion? The current situation of these two fields is: Google and Bing have confirmed that they ignore them, and writing them in the map does not change the crawling schedule. What will truly be read and affect behavior is the last modification time of each URL. Shifting the focus of maintenance from adjusting frequency and priority to writing timestamps honestly and clearing out addresses that should not be there is the effective investment in this matter.

The actual function of the two fields now

changefreq originally wanted the site to tell the engine 'This page is updated every day', priority wanted the site to indicate 'The homepage is more important than inner pages'. The problem is that the engine does not trust the self-reported data from the submitter: the crawling schedule depends on its own observed historical change rhythm and link weight distribution, and the self-reported values may be misused or lack verification.

Dyno Mapper comes to a very direct conclusion in the **practice of site maps: for Google and Bing, the answer is to ignore, both have confirmed that they do not read these fields. Therefore, the premise of questions like 'Would increasing the priority from 0.5 to 1.0 improve inclusion' does not stand.

Why should lastmod be honest?

In the same document, another key point is: In the single address attribute of the sitemap, the last modified time is the one that truly has a substantial impact on Google's crawling behavior. Its credibility lies in the verifiability - when the page content changes, the timestamp should change; if it doesn't change, pushing new content forcibly will instead cause the engine to reduce its trust in the entire file.

There are three disciplines in practice. First, update the time only when there are actual changes in the text or structured fields, do not refresh the website timestamp in bulk for template adjustments. Second, when importing historical content in bulk, the time should be taken from the content's own modification time, not the import time. Third, automatic generation should be based on data layer records, not on script traversal of the page to output.

Why can't the jump page and error page stay in the diagram?

After the update, old addresses are often still in the sitemap, actually returning redirect or invalid pages. These addresses take up file volume, causing the crawling quota to be spent on pages that do not need to be indexed, and will also reduce the credibility of the entire file. Nightwatch's suggestion is clear: do not index pages marked as not participating in indexing, redirect addresses, and error pages that return invalid status codes.

The method is not manual deletion, but to tighten the generation conditions: only output links with normal status, allowed indexing, and pointing to the final address. AnQiCMS's site map is automatically generated,配合 301 redirect management, when the site is revised, the old addresses are set up to point to new addresses with redirect rules, the generator generates maps according to the current valid addresses, and such dirty addresses will naturally not enter the map.

The order of generation and maintenance

The wrong order will lead to repeated rework. The reasonable way is to first do the static and address rules, confirm the stability of the page address; then check the redirect mapping, converge the historical addresses into the final form; finally, let the sitemap be automatically generated according to the rules and connect the push.

The notification of new content is another matter: the sitemap solves the full amount of backup, and the active push solves the problem of 'the newly published articles being found as soon as possible'. AnQiCMS's link push management supports the active push of Baidu and Bing, both of which should work together instead of replacing each other, don't expect one to be done and the other can be ignored.

The file size is also limited, a single sitemap file has a limit on the number of addresses and volume, and if it exceeds the limit, it should be split into multiple files and summarized with an index file instead of being crammed into one file.

Common questions

Should these two fields just be deleted?Keeping the default value does not affect anything, deleting or not deleting does not change the result. The focus should be on timestamps and address quality.

The sitemap has been submitted but there is no change in inclusion, what should be checked first?First check the page itself: is it marked as not participating in indexing, does it have duplicate content, or does it not have any internal links pointing to it? Most inclusion issues are related to the discoverability of the page, not the submission action.

How often is it appropriate to update the sitemap?Let the generator follow the content, refresh when there are new pages or real modifications. Running the entire site timestamp on a fixed schedule actually reduces credibility.

Should images and attachments be shown separately?It is worth having a separate one when there is a demand for image traffic, with the same conditions of valid address and honest timestamp.

Related articles

Lightweight open-source programs only have a few data tables, where does the memory save?

The number of data tables is not directly equal to low memory usage, it saves the model definitions, query construction, and hook registration that need to be loaded each time. The resident memory is mainly determined by the initialization cost of the running language, the number of objects, and the cache level. This article breaks down these layers to explain where the lightweight program of a few tables saves, what criteria to judge by, and how to weigh the cost of the custom content model.

2026-11-01

The platform is growing fast but needs to be locked, where is the migration cost calculated?

The platform's rapid growth does not mean that the content can be taken away. The two sets of data verified on the day show that Wix grew by 32.6% in 2026, accounting for 4.3% of global sites, while the typical cost of rebuilding a small website that leaves a hosting website platform is between six thousand and eighteen thousand dollars. This article breaks down the migration cost into three areas: content structure, historical addresses, and dynamic features, and explains the feasible approach to leaving a path in advance.

2026-11-01

Each website pays separately for the website building tool, how to amortize the cost for multiple sites

Hosted website building tools usually charge a subscription fee per site, and the cost increases linearly as the number of sites increases; the comparison criteria I checked that day is that open-source content systems can use the same installation pool of resources. This article explains the cost structure of a multi-brand matrix, as well as how to group permissions and high-risk operations at the site level after multiple sites are brought into one backend, to avoid thinning out costs while also thinning out risks.

2026-11-01

Self-hosted content systems need to allocate a few hours for maintenance each month.

The maintenance hours of self-hosted content systems mainly fall on two things: patches and backups. The operation口径 on the day of verification is that critical to high-risk level patches come once every six to eight weeks, with obvious labor costs in addition to the computing power bill. This article divides the monthly maintenance of the small station into two segments: cannot be saved and can be saved, and gives the method of working hours budgeting, and explains which segment can be saved by the technology stack and deployment method.

2026-11-01

Is the page performance good or bad determined by the website building tool or the host?

The pass rate of core web page indicators for the same batch of sites across platforms can be increased from more than 40% to more than 80%, while the difference brought by the host tier is not as significant. The first level of variables affecting performance is the website building tool and its implementation method, followed by the host and caching configuration. This article provides a two-step self-checking order and explains which parts to adjust first before changing the host to avoid spending the budget on less profitable aspects.

2026-11-01

How many brands stay on the AI recommendation list month after month?

A widely cited statistic shows that among thousands of tracked brands, only thirty-six can stay in the top of the mention list on each platform every month. This proportion indicates that the recommendation list of generative search is highly mobile, and it should be fixed before it is used as an evaluation indicator. This article explains the source of the list mobility and gives two verifiable changes in the station.

2026-11-01

How much does the proportion of questions about AI overview leading to brand mentions differ from conversational answers?

In the same round of statistics, Google's AI overview leads to brand mentions in about 37% of questions, while the proportion of conversational answers mentioning brands is less than 4%. The difference is nearly an order of magnitude. The gap comes from the different search and aggregation methods of the two types of entries, which cannot be directly combined into a visibility score. This article gives the baseline for how to take the two types of entries, how to group by intent, and what to check for in-site承接.

2026-11-01

Will pages generated in batches by AI be judged as spam content by search engines?

The point of judgment is not about what tool is used, but whether the page is only used to manipulate rankings in bulk. With unverified facts and repetitive template sentences being laid out all at once, it is easy to be classified as scale content abuse. This article explains what three types of facts need to be checked before publication, how internal review enters the publishing chain, and why collected content and original content need to be processed separately.

2026-11-01