Maintaining links from j-1.5 to j-3.9 - Redirects?

[ggossamer]

Hi,
I have a joomla 3.9 site that has been migrated from joomla 1.0.10 - yes, going back like twenty years. It has nearly 65k articles. We've enabled SEF links, so links like /content/view/216576/169/ have been migrated to /artlcle-name.

The problem is that there is twenty years of history with Google using the old format, including links stored in people's bookmarks, etc.

Do you have any tips on either how to maintain the old format alongside the new format, or how to build a table of redirects that correlate the old links to the new ones?

Perhaps some kind of htaccess file with a series of redirects?

Is this procedure documented anywhere?

[leolam]

You can use the redirect component to realize this see https://docs.joomla.org/Help39:Componen ... ct_Manager

Leo

[ggossamer]

The problem is that there's 65,000+ articles in the current database. There's no way to do this manually, and doing it in batch mode requires knowing the relationship between the current article paths and the new.

How do I correlate the old articles with the new?

[Per Yngve Berg]

The redirects are stored in the database table #_redirect_links.

[ggossamer]

I'm not sure that's helpful; the problem is getting the redirects in the database in the first place from the articles in the v1.0.10 database.

Would you explain how that would work?

[Per Yngve Berg]

Sorry, I don't have a Joomla 1.0 database to look at.

Have you migrated with new id, or have you preserved the id numbers?

[ggossamer]

Sorry, I don't have a Joomla 1.0 database to look at.

Have you migrated with new id, or have you preserved the id numbers?

It looks like the ID numbers are being preserved.

The final migration hasn't yet occurred.

[ggossamer]

Any further ideas?

[Per Yngve Berg]

links like /content/view/216576/169/ have been migrated to /artlcle-name.

I presume 169 is the article id. "/artlcle-name" would be the alias column from the #_content table and not the title column.

[ggossamer]

links like /content/view/216576/169/ have been migrated to /artlcle-name.

I presume 169 is the article id. "/artlcle-name" would be the alias column from the #_content table and not the title column.

No, I think 169 is the category ID and 216576 is the article ID, but it's apparently not possible to use the same URI on the new system to access the same article.

[ggossamer]

Actually, I don't know what the 169 is for. It's not the section ID. The section ID is 82 and the parent_id is 0.

[ggossamer]

Does anyone else have any further ideas here?

Is it not possible to produce a list of all URLs from all articles in the database?

What is the format for a URL in a joomla-1.5 site?

I've seen several variations, including:

/content/view/<articleID>/<catID>/
/content/blogsection/<catid>/<articleID>/
/component/option,com_registration/task,register/
/content/section/<articleID>/<catID>/

Wouldn't it be possible to write a script that loops through the database with this information and either write it to another table that could be referenced after the migration or use it to reference the article on the new system to create an SEF link based on the title_alias?

[leolam]

If you use a final migration and do this with SP-Upgrade the id's are not changing if you set the correct settings however this is possible:

couldn't it be possible to write a script that loops through the database with this information and either write it to another table that could be referenced after the migration or use it to reference the article on the new system to create an SEF link based on the title_alias?

Yes a good developer can create such script

Leo

[ggossamer]

We have a joomla-1.0.10 site that we're planning to upgrade to 3.9.x. The problem is migrating the existing links, and maintaining the ranking with Google and external links.

When someone goes through the (arduous) process of migrating 1.0.10 -> 1.0.15 -> 2.0, etc.., how do you maintain the old link format so as to not create 404s for existing links on your site and externally linking into your site?

[ggossamer]

Looks like my message on the Migration board got pulled because of this message, but when I posted this message I didn't realize there was a Migration board.

Anyone have any further ideas? How do you maintain old links from one version upgrade to another?

The problem is that we have an old joomla install that's being upgraded to the current, and the /content/view/64/3423 style links are no longer supported in the current version.

How do we maintain the existing inbound links to the site to avoid 404s for an old site when upgrading?

Is there no built-in ability in Joomla to do this?

[leolam]

The message was pulled because of cross posting same issue but not worth-it to discuss.

You won't be able to maintain your URL's for the simple fact that the entire methodology of section/categories was replaced a long time ago by nested categories and your url's have section numbers in the links which we do not have any longer. The new router in Joomla 3.9 allows for URL's without the annoying id's in the links, a wish many, many Joomla users have vented for many years which we realized.

Now you can go on ignoring my previous message and asking the same question time after time but it woo't change a thing for the fact. If you want this bulk-redirected somebody has to write a script for it and it will cost you money

Leo

[ggossamer]

The message was pulled because of cross posting same issue but not worth-it to discuss.

As I mentioned, I didn't realize at first there was a migration board. My mistake.

You won't be able to maintain your URL's for the simple fact that the entire methodology of section/categories was replaced a long time ago by nested categories and your url's have section numbers in the links which we do not have any longer. The new router in Joomla 3.9 allows for URL's without the annoying id's in the links, a wish many, many Joomla users have vented for many years which we realized.

Thanks for the succinct explanation. I just wanted to be sure I understood that not even in the migration procedure there existed a way to "enable" the ability to maintain the old format too. I don't believe I had asked that question previously.

Now you can go on ignoring my previous message and asking the same question time after time but it woo't change a thing for the fact. If you want this bulk-redirected somebody has to write a script for it and it will cost you money

Yes, understood, thanks.