depends entirely on what "republish" actually means here. i've seen this play out with clients trying to scale content like they scale ad spend - and it backfires hard if you don't have a phased rollout plan.
if you're updating existing URLs with fresh content (same slugs, same canonicals)? Generally fine. Google will re-evaluate on the next crawl, but you risk a quality reassessment if the new stuff is thinner or drifts off-topic. stagger it - batches of 200-300 over 2-3 weeks. monitor indexing coverage in GSC between each batch, same way you'd watch ROAS after a budget increase.
If you're creating 2000 brand-new URLs that replace or redirect from old ones? Higher risk than a new campaign rollout. redirect chains, orphaned links, crawl budget gone to hell - at that scale it's brutal. map every old URL to its new equivalent before hitting publish on anything. No shortcuts.
if you're just changing publication dates with minimal content changes? don't. Google caught onto that pattern late last year. Freshness signals without real substance now flags as manipulation. Basically ad fraud for SEO.
What's the actual driver here? Migration, content refresh, or restructuring? That changes the playbook completely.
