In any case after digging further I have found where it checks for robots.txt. Thanks!
On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 5:34 PM Walter Underwood <wun...@wunderwood.org> wrote: > Which was exactly what I suggested. > > wunder > Walter Underwood > wun...@wunderwood.org > http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) > > > > On Jun 1, 2017, at 3:31 PM, David Choi <choi.davi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > In the mean time I have found a better solution at the moment is to test > on > > a site that allows users to crawl their site. > > > > On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 5:26 PM David Choi <choi.davi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> I think you misunderstand the argument was about stealing content. Sorry > >> but I think you need to read what people write before making bold > >> statements. > >> > >> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 5:20 PM Walter Underwood <wun...@wunderwood.org> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Let’s not get snarky right away, especially when you are wrong. > >>> > >>> Corporations do not generally ignore robots.txt. I worked on a > commercial > >>> web spider for ten years. Occasionally, our customers did need to > bypass > >>> portions of robots.txt. That was usually because of a > poorly-maintained web > >>> server, or because our spider could safely crawl some content that > would > >>> cause problems for other crawlers. > >>> > >>> If you want to learn crawling, don’t start by breaking the conventions > of > >>> good web citizenship. Instead, start with sitemap.xml and crawl the > >>> preferred portions of a site. > >>> > >>> https://www.sitemaps.org/index.html < > https://www.sitemaps.org/index.html> > >>> > >>> If the site blocks you, find a different site to learn on. > >>> > >>> I like the looks of “Scrapy”, written in Python. I haven’t used it for > >>> anything big, but I’d start with that for learning. > >>> > >>> https://scrapy.org/ <https://scrapy.org/> > >>> > >>> If you want to learn on a site with a lot of content, try ours, > chegg.com > >>> But if your crawler gets out of hand, crawling too fast, we’ll block > it. > >>> Any other site will do the same. > >>> > >>> I would not base the crawler directly on Solr. A crawler needs a > >>> dedicated database to record the URLs visited, errors, duplicates, > etc. The > >>> output of the crawl goes to Solr. That is how we did it with Ultraseek > >>> (before Solr existed). > >>> > >>> wunder > >>> Walter Underwood > >>> wun...@wunderwood.org > >>> http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) > >>> > >>> > >>>> On Jun 1, 2017, at 3:01 PM, David Choi <choi.davi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Oh well I guess its ok if a corporation does it but not someone > wanting > >>> to > >>>> learn more about the field. I actually have written a crawler before > as > >>>> well as the you know Inverted Index of how solr works but I just > thought > >>>> its architecture was better suited for scaling. > >>>> > >>>> On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 4:47 PM Dave <hastings.recurs...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> And I mean that in the context of stealing content from sites that > >>>>> explicitly declare they don't want to be crawled. Robots.txt is to be > >>>>> followed. > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Jun 1, 2017, at 5:31 PM, David Choi <choi.davi...@gmail.com> > >>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hello, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> I was wondering if anyone could guide me on how to crawl the web and > >>>>>> ignore the robots.txt since I can not index some big sites. Or if > >>> someone > >>>>>> could point how to get around it. I read somewhere about a > >>>>>> protocol.plugin.check.robots > >>>>>> but that was for nutch. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The way I index is > >>>>>> bin/post -c gettingstarted https://en.wikipedia.org/ > >>>>>> > >>>>>> but I can't index the site I'm guessing because of the robots.txt. > >>>>>> I can index with > >>>>>> bin/post -c gettingstarted http://lucene.apache.org/solr > >>>>>> > >>>>>> which I am guessing allows it. I was also wondering how to find the > >>> name > >>>>> of > >>>>>> the crawler bin/post uses. > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >
